In class on Wednesday we discussed art, culture, religion, and music in Tibetan settlements in India, and in India in general. The cultural discussions were enthralling, hearing the different kinds of modern Tibetan music was totally interesting, and always I love discussing religion—especially ones so vastly different from my own. However, when discussing art, I had a really hard time being… "artistic.” Art is beautiful. But analyzing art sort of kills it for me. I like to look at it--sometimes for longer periods of time, but often briefly—admire the skill it required to create it, and then just move on. Analyzing art, however, has never been appealing to me, probably because it’s so subjective. Anyway, in class it became painfully obvious that analyzing art, especially with artists in my midst, is still not a skill I have, bur more than that it’s not an interest. I have no desire to do it. However, when Rachel said we were “crossing disciplines” I felt an instant urge to improve the skill of analyzing art, even if it’s not an interest of mine. At the moment she used that phrase, analyzing art became a skill of being open-minded, well-rounded, and well, able to “cross disciplines.” It’s another way to relate to diverse groups. Now I feel almost a responsibility to improve my skill of analyzing art, at least in a way that helps me better relate to a culture or group. Being an expert in one discipline is great, but shutting out all other disciplines limits my ability to extend knowledge to many people.
So my resolution is to at least study pieces of art that I observe. I don’t think I’ll ever have a skill to be subjective and tell someone how a painting makes me “feel,” but knowing the history or cultural backgrounds to different pieces will give me a place to start understanding the source of the beauty of the art. Either that or it will totally kill the beauty of the art, which is my greatest fear. It’s worth trying though.
No comments:
Post a Comment