Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
The Language of Art
Even the notion of the word wisdom is problematic today. In the deconstructed world we live in, there is no such thing as an authoritative or univocal notion of what wisdom means; there are several traditions and discourses.
Modernity has exposed humanity to multiple traditions. It follows that people draw interpretation of art from different understanding of conflicting cultures. There is no overarching tradition that is the authoritative voice to be drawn from when analyzing art. Even the artists themselves draw inspiration from the vast wealth of knowledge the said exposure avails. Rather than the observers leveraging the similar wealth of data presented by a conglomeration of traditions, they appear to ignore them altogether (Downey and Ruf 2). The statement implies that cultures no longer exist in isolation observing their rituals unperturbed. Traditions have become deconstructed, succumbing to invading influences, at times lowering their values to accommodate the alleged enlightenment. The increased diversity in opinion has caused the truth to be relative to a person’s background. In the recent generation, people are preoccupied with the present that they overlook the essential quality of the past. The internet working in tandem with easily accessible mobile phones have liberalized opinions. Every individual hastily wants to contribute to the current phenomena devoid of supporting evidence. The said observations on arts are no longer the reserve of experts rather anyone willing can express them via the web. The absoluteness of truth has been diluted as there is no benchmark of attain wisdom. Unfortunately, taking any route will not lead to the same destination. The statement alludes to the need to focus the said diversity towards a singular goal.
The decline of tradition can be attributed to politicization of religion and faith that is otherwise a treasure of historical data. Religions have been known to record history with utmost precision. By excluding religion as a source of information, contemporary observers miss the spiritual significance of art. History and religion cannot be binary the same as the present is incomprehensible if not informed by the past. Therefore, their opinions represent only one dimension of the entire picture. Similarly, there appears to be a discrepancy between the aesthetics of a piece of art and the intended meaning (Downey and Ruf 6). If the observer is informed, the meaning is rarely lost through translation. Ideally, art is abstract with every observer having a unique perspective. However, if they are guided by standard parameters they come up with virtually the same observation. As the use of religion as parameter to guide observation is on the decline, a new aspect of language is employed. The Slav and Tatars utilize humor in their art to influence the minds of observers (Downey and Ruf 8). They are able to give critiques of complex situations with minimal confrontation.
Observation
is an aspect of imagination if it is not guided it is bound to go wild. The
observations will be subject to the person’s emotional state. Basing one’s
evaluation from knowledge helps one to become more objective. The language
grasp of a fifteen and fifty year old are different. It follows a disparity in
the wealth of observation is no surprise. The writer champions the acquisition
of artistic language to aid in interpreting art. Art is the physical
manifestation of research. Understanding the language of the artist will give a
person a better preview of a particular talisman and piece (Downey). Language is the carrier of culture
and at the centre of the latter is religion. Acknowledging that no one has the
monopoly of knowledge is the first step in the right direction. Diverse
languages will reveal different qualities of a piece. Being multi-linguistic
gives one the advantage of diverse perspectives hence brings one closer to the
absolute truth. In fact, the observe may discover aspects of the masterpiece
hitherto hidden to the artist himself. In most cases, the belief system and
values that inform a particular language may conflict. One has to negotiate the
meaning internally.
It is from a compromise that true strength is revealed. As aforementioned, one
must attempt to utilize a disarming technique like humor to air their
discontent. Direct confrontation often diverts one from the truth.
Works Cited
Downey, A. and Ruf, B. “Mirrors For Princes.” A conversation with Slavs and Tatars (2014): 1-22. Print.
Downey, A. “Slavs and Tatars. In conversation with Anthony Downey.” Online Video clip. Ibraaz and The Third Line Gallery. Ibraaz, 30 April 2014. Web. 3 Feb 2016.