Monday, December 17, 2007

The Art of Solipsism

“Art for art’s sake.” The statement is inherently solipsistic. And in a survey of the art considered to be “modern” it must be admitted that solipsism is a distinguishing characteristic of the “modern”. In music, in sculpture, in painting, in architecture, in literature; we find the same stamp. This does not mean that it is bad, and of course the best of it is quite good; but if it is solipsistic, then it is solipsistic: and it is obviously and blatantly solipsistic. What interests me is the phenomenon of the genius of a culture turning in upon its self, and becoming its own subject matter. When art no longer serves truth, beauty, and good; should one not ask why? And for that matter what was ever in it for culture with that “truth, beauty, and good” thing anyway? Is there any reason that it should not be abandoned?

At present we exist in the so-called “post-modern” era, but the solipsistic narcissism of the “modern” era has inoculated the popular mind. There is a navel-gazing element awakened by modernity that must be assimilated if culture is to advance beyond self-worship. Art cannot but express the seething flux of human aspiration, and perhaps the “modern” period is the cultural equivalent of the adolescent’s rebellion against the constraints to will imposed upon individuals by the dictates of society.

If so, then it is a milepost on the path of cosmic maturation. And when we have become the future we will look upon these creations as charming mementos from our rambunctious youth.




Bad Art


a lot of people these days don't trust themselves to know bad art

well, you can always tell bad art
because it needs an essay to prop it up


and a crowd of boot lickers and apologists to appreciate it



Sunday, December 16, 2007

Word and Symmetry


The existence of words is made possible by the mind's spontaneous recognition of symmetries. Trees, for instance, share common elements that could be described as the symmetries of tree-ness. The symmetries of tree-ness can receive an additional mental symmetry in utterance. 

This utterance becomes a cultural artifact, and we say something has been named. When the culture of utterance achieves a palette of symmetries that enable communication of even the most rudimentary sort we have a language. Crows have a language. Dogs have a language. Almost all animals have a repertoire of utterance as behavior cuing specific symmetries found in their environment; i.e. a language. None of these languages seem rudimentary to their native speakers because any language is limited by the physical ability to form sounds, and by the native ability to recognize and bring into the field of consciousness, symmetries. 

Words do not symbolize their referents. Words become part of the mental symmetry of their referents; and symmetry is the foundation of the recognition of anything what so ever. To perceive something is one thing and to recognize it is another. What ever the reality of trees may be the only way we know anything about them is through information assembly in the brain. The assembly of this information into meaning requires the spontaneous recognition of symmetries, and utterance becomes an integral element of the corresponding symmetry. Words do not re-present their referents; words are an integral element of presence.



Sunday, December 02, 2007