Is Art a media for the immediate

All things related to Art! Poetry, painting, literature, visual, theater, movies, tv, music, media, culture, etc. Share your creativity or others', reviews, aesthetic theories, etc.

Is Art a media for the immediate

Postby henriette on November 2nd, 2014, 4:54 pm 

Art is a media that offers an immediate contact with reality. While we may be foul by the mediation of knowledge derived from senses, Art plugs our spirit directly with reality; Art is thus striving against life because life makes use of our spirit so that we perform acts on the basis of the information we derive from senses. Our spirit is indeed enslaved by life and this slavery is called action. Art frees us from life and action in a paradoxical way : Art is a media that helps us to reach the immediate (without media).
User avatar
Posts: 367
Joined: 30 Oct 2007

Re: Is Art a media for the immediate

Postby Rilx on November 3rd, 2014, 3:57 pm 

I can't think that art is more immediate than life. Instead I think that what creates the feeling of immediacy is the metaphoric content of art. First, metaphoric content can be much wider than what is even possible in the conscious content formed by (immediate) sensory perception. Second, perceptions are loaded by knowledge-based explanations; metaphors are more of "pure experience".

I'd say that "art is a media that helps us to reach the authentic" - but within the limits of human life.

Re: Is Art a media for the immediate

Postby owleye on November 3rd, 2014, 5:05 pm 


I would tend to go along with your observation about the directness of art, particularly as it compares with those based on words. And indeed, it seems to convey things that language (built around concepts) have much trouble with. And, unlike Plato, who despite the poetry of some of his "dialogs", more or less trashed art because it was a kind of an image of an image, instead taught us to reach for Forms, or Ideas, like Truth, Goodness, and Beauty, I think there is much conveyed by art. (Note that at my age I'm currently being impressed with cinematography, though literature is not far behind.)

However, there's one aspect of the difference that I have some difficulty with. Both forms of expression (art and language) are able to rely on our ability to conjure up our own sense of involvement with these art-forms. Language is principally linear and unfolding, whereas painting and sculpture (though there is movement involved) has a way of transforming us in different ways, despite the indirectness of language. Somehow our language capability allows us to quickly remove or overcome the actual sounds and pictures involved in language and get to its meaning. It's like when we say of a track in a cloud chamber: "That's an electron." (Another example I've used is on seeing a cloud of dust advancing along the road from our porch, we say "I see Aunt Polly is coming.")

Return to Art

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests