Things are getting more and more eccentric at Casa de la Swain. Changing styles in my textile work, falling in love again with painting and photography...and then there is the ever illusive quest for continuing creativity through working with Eric Maisel. Still on the road teaching, posting now at the Ragged Cloth Cafe and taking the pledge to keep handmaiden up to date.

Monday, September 26, 2005

In Response to Pat's Comment

Pat's Place said...

I don't believe it's our responsibility to evoke a response in others... We can merely offer our version of our truth. What happens after that is totally out of our control and certainly NOT our responsibility as to what or even IF the viewer gets anything out of it. I'm not even convinced it's our responsibility to SHOW our art to anyone else. But I do believe it IS our responsibility to CREATE.
Just my opinion...

First Pat, thank you for your comments and I completely agree that it is our responsibility to create....but I might respond to what end? Certainly, I believe in art as therapy but that is not the subject to which my post was directed. As a matter of fact, your "version of the truth" is exactly what evokes a response in the viewer. You are right what the viewer think or doesn't think is out of our control which is what I meant by the artist is responsible only to themselves.
However, I am reminded of the "tree falling in the woods" analogy regarding your comment about not showing our art. My true feeling are artist are meant to bring change to the world; if this art isn' t seen how can that change occur. That change doesn't have to be social or political but merely a statement of beauty.
And I know this is going to get me in a whole whirlwind of trouble but I do not believe everyone is an artist. Everyone is creative and has the right to self-expression but that is not being an artist.....guess I better shut up before I get in too deep.

8 comments:

Valeri said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Valeri said...

In my opinion you are an artist if your work produces a response that makes people think! And every person's work produces different responses in different people. I personally don't see a line of bricks or a dead sheep as art however much money it fetches or however much prestige at the Tate but obviously some people see something in it! Or do they...is it a big con? As Ginger said in her statement art is her voice and by creating one is speaking. Not everyone has anything to say! Some people have lots to say all the time, some of it interesting and others have the occasional inspired speech! As in life! Grin Don't flame me its my opinion only not the 11th commandment!

Debra said...

Hah! I knew you would have to reply to this... Good discussion. It needs to be made.

Scrapmaker said...

Welll.....I agree that not everyone lives up to their creative potential, and in THAT way "not everyone is an artist".
I DO think the capacity for creativity is universal and very much a part of what it means to be human. You could point out the difference between the kind of creativity it takes to be an actor, a painter, an engineer, or a physicist, but I think they all have roots in the same place. We might not think of engineers as artists, but hey, I have seen some really beautiful bridges.
And physicists are as wacky as they come.
Despite what I see as our common potential, whether or not the path to creativity is taken is another story. Defining what is being produced as "art" is also tricky. The slope get very slippery when you start trying to define who and what an artisit is, especially if we are trying to define that for anyone but ourselves. Jen

Pat's Place said...

Good discussion. Good points all. My first reaction is this: there are plants the world over producing beautiful flowers that are never seen. That is just what is so. Why is it art must be seen? It has value by virtue of beingness. It has value because the artist moved something from the inside to the outside reality. The artist sees the work. Sometimes that is what is most important - to see one's truth mirrored back in one's work...
I'll have to think about this further in order to make a proper response - and maybe blog to it, too. But for now, I have a deadline to meet!
Keep it going! Great thread... :)

Gerrie said...

I am a little late to the discussion, but here is my 2 cents. I have to create and I create to evoke a response in others. I can't exist in a vacuum. I need the response, the reaction, whatever it is, from others.

Caitlin said...

Hmmm this is something that comes up in class all the time - whether art needs an audience to complete it. No answers, just opinions - for me, yes, an artwork isn't finished until someone else sees it and reacts to it (in whatever way they choose, indifference or thought or whatever). That doesn't mean that I create for other people, nor do I need other people's reactions to validate my work - but I DO think of art as a conversation between the artist and the viewer. Darn it, G, now you've made me go and think about all this stuff and I have to go write more to get it clear in my head! LOL!

Debra said...

There are TOO MANY good comments here to leave this as comments. I'm going to blog my reaction (basically to Pat's comments)... but I'll probably refer to more...

And I suggest that more people blog their reactions.

Blog Archive