ARTISTIC TALENT : THE GIFTED FEW?

[EtherealMooncat]

ARTISTIC TALENT : THE GIFTED FEW?
Some Musings on wether Artistic Ability is A Gift given to the Choosen Few, or a Latent Potential Inherant in Everyone. Including Divers Remarks on the Role of the Artist in Society, which altho' Initialy Relevant end up Wandering Down to Tangent Town & Dropping into a Bar for a Few Drinks. Or Something.


Firstly, when I say 'artistic' I mean in the broad sense of the term, not just the visual arts but Music, Literature, Performance and such…and not just 'Fine Art' but Illustration, Folk Art, Street Art and wot-not. Maybe 'creative' would be a better word.

From what I've observed the General Concensus seems to lean towards the 'Gift of the Few' Theory. Personaly I lean more towards the other view. What do you think?

Of course, there are some factors which lend weight to Gift Theory. Wether we regard such a notion as a fact, or in the interest of open-mindedness merely aknoweledge it as a possibility, we could go on to debate wether this 'gift' is down to Nature or Nurture until the cows come home, flop down in their armchairs with a weary sigh, crack open a beer and settle down in front of the TV to watch 'The X Factor' or some such tripe.

I did briefly consider enumerating the 'evidence' for the Gift Theory, but on reflection I'm not gonna bother. Firstly 'cos, as sophisticated artsy dudes, you're probably well aware of them already; and secondly 'cos like most cats I'm lazy.*stops typing & spends next 2 hours lounging about and washing behind ears (quite unessacerily 'cos they were perfectly clean to start with) in a laconic stylii*
Far better methinks to leave that to Someone Else who takes that viewpoint. Besides, as I suspect the Gift Theory to be a Big Bag of Bobbins I probably wouldn't do it justice. If you, Dear Reader, are one of them there Someone Elses: go ahead and make your case. My opinions aren't set in stone, you might convince me.

I have to admit, part of my tendency towards the 'Latent Potential in Everyone' Theory (erk, a somewhat cumbersome title, lets refer to it henceforth as the Pook Theory. There's absoloutly no logical reason for this but it is, you must admit, a lot more compact. And it sounds kinda cute… Anyway where was I… oh yeah… my pref for the Pook Theory…) is rooted in my subjective / emotional attitudes. The Gift Theory has a certain implied & inherant elitism to it; and I have a certain distaste for elitism. Elitism leads to Heiararchies, Heiararchies lead to Established Social Order, Established Social Order leads to Authority and I have an inherant suspicion of Authority. *shrugs* That's Mooncat's for ya... *snicker*.

Which brings us round to the tricksy subject of the role of the artist in society. The work of a French sociologist called Pierre Bordieu is rather illuminating here. He came to some very interesting & perceptive conclusions about the fabric of society & how that fabric is perpetuated by means of what he refered to as field, habitus, symbolic violence and…oh, it's a subject in itself… if your interested there's a good intro to his work here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Bourdieu

Curiously enough, the person who first introduced me to this Bourdieu dude was citing his writings as a justification of artistic elites. From what I've subsequently read it seems to me that if anything his work does quite the reverse! As a sociologist he postulated the aforementioned concepts as objective observations on society, but avoided attaching value judgements therof. If you concede that sociology is a valid science then this Spockesque detachment is a commendable stance for a scientist. However, as an individual Bourdieu was a left-wing activist who used his sociological discoveries / theories to further the cause of workers rights / civil liberties. In other words to expose & undermine (public & hidden) elites (from a Political Perspective).

I don't want to get sucked into politics here, so – from an Artistic Perspective: surely one of the crucial roles of the artist in society (at least during the last 100 - 150 years) has been to stand on the border between Society and the Wilderness and thrust a Stick into the Spokes of the Bicycle Wheel of Established Order, thus sending the smug Cyclist of Elitism flying over the metaphorical handlebars? Dada anyone?

Hmmm, time to mozzy on back to the main topic I think.
Perhaps true 'genius' is a rare & mysterious thing. I'm not sure. But I reckon that Everyone has the Seed of Immense Creative Potential. And also the potential for a perceptive awareness that can step outside the social conditioning of Mainstream Culture (which says yer can't start a sentence with 'and' but I just did so Ha!) It's just a question of how deeply that Seed is buried; and of – if it is brought near enough to the surface to sprout – whether it is nurtured & encouraged to grow towards it's full potential. Of course, this is a subjective opinion, it doesn't lend any real weight of 'proof' to the Pook Theory. And so for years the General Concensus pooh-poohed the Pook. *narrows eyes & glowers malevolently at the General Concensus*

But then, a few years ago I heard by chance a radio prog about a big research project that some Music Dept Uni Boffins had undertaken to resolve the question: is the concept that (musical) talent is the preserve of a gifted elite a Fact or an erroneous Sociological Belief. Their methods were rather interesting & their results made some profound points about both Art and Society. So what did they discover?...

*pauses for dramatic, cliffhanger type effect*

Find out in the second Vaguely Interesting installment of 'Artistic Talent : The Gifted Few?' Or not. I mean, maybe nobody who has read this gives two hoots what they discovered. In which case it's hardly worth the trouble of me going into it innit! Or perhaps you know already. In which case ditto.
Actualy, is anyone still reading this!?? It has rather gone on a bit. In fact, all this typing is making my fingers hurt (awww, pawr ickle me)……

*Winks & vanishes in a Wisp of Egalitarianism*
_________________
"When it is dark enough you can see the stars"

[Darkhouse]

Well you have the gift of run away typewriter syndrome.and a fine gift it is too,hang on while I throw in one of these emoticons,apparently they make the messengers intention clear,but I am an ancient one or at least in terms of evolution I would most likely be long dead in my cave by now and since the emoticons were somewhat different on the cave wall in my day,I'll settle for the long extinct? many horned animal called
'BlimeyhatsabigquestionatfivetotwelveonatuesdaymorningwhenIshouldbemakingartosaurus.' symbol

In short for now,and maybe for ever if I can't think of anything else worth saying,I reckon

it's down to curiosity and hard work. Thought into practice, failure into why and how you might resolve and succeed.Einstein apparently said something like
"I am not a genius,I am just intensely curious"

You get good at what sparks your interest and holds it.Some people are just more curious than others about their subject hence I can add up and subtract but I'm no maths genius or even close because numbers don't interest me enough outside my bank account to practice. I'm pretty darned good on a guitar and rubbish on a tuba because I'm not drawn to being a Tuba champ.Then again I'm not a (insert fave axe hero/ heroine name here) because though I enjoy it, clearly I'm lazy/not curious enough about it to progress beyond a certain standard.But thank the gods for that since otherwise there would be no orchestras,or at least not any that didn't consisting entirely of tuba players (no insult to any tuba players out there,I'll happily give it a go with a jam session)

Of course this begs the question,why would someone be more curious about one thing over another. I have no idea beyond nature nurture and circumstance.Many a child forced to play the piano does not play as an adult. but if they are curious enough about the piano that just happens to be in the room well they might just pull it apart and grow up to build the best damned pianos anyone has ever played.IE there's no accounting for it,but the world wouldn't run without some variety of talents,and that includes the plumber fixing my sink,assuming he turns up.Clearly he has no talent for time keeping.

And then of course we arrive at the subjective eye and there's a whole other can of squirms

D

[EtherealMooncat]

Well there's a Curious Coincidence.
*cue theremin music & an ethereal choir with heavy phaser / reverb FX*
I'd decided that next time I visited this forum I'd write a message to that Darkhouse dude, expressing my admiration for the astounding treasure trove of artwork within The Darkhouse Quarter.com (which I wandered into for the first time at the end of last week). And when I get here what should I find but a comment from yerself! I'll come back to the subject of your website anon, but firstly – regarding your above words…

Thanx for such an eloquent & witty reply! Ah, the... BlimeyhatsabigquestionatfivetotwelveonatuesdaymorningwhenIshouldbemakingartosaurus. I've seen a few of those, altho' I'd be curious to know what the emoticon for it looked like.

I think you made some interesting points here. Curiousity is indeed an important factor that I overlooked. As is hard work – often with no guarantee of recognition or success, irrespective of talent. The obvious example here is Van Goth: an ignored pauper in his lifetime, 20 years after his death his brilliance was recognised & today his work sells for crazee money. Of course he didn't do what he did for fame or money, & quite right too, but the irony is…ironic.

The child forced to play the piano thing was something I wrote into my original draft of this post, but decided to cut out 'cos it's a whole other can of squirms innit!

Reading between the lines it seems that your overall jist is that the 'Artistic Talent…' question is one of those fundamentally unanswerable Existential Questions such as "does god exist?" or "why do the manufacture's of cornflour consider it obligatory to glue the inner packet to the outer box for no apparent reason (other perhaps than some form of sick enjoyment derived from the knowledge that, in attempting to open the packaging, their customers will – with a chilling inevitability - end up cursing in a cloud of torn paper & cornflour dust *ahem*). And of course it is just such a question. But one worthwhile speculating over non- the-less methinks.

Dislike maths / play the guitar eh?...snap!


And so to the mysterious world of the recently discovered images from the eldritch decay of the darkhouse archive. The intro pages immediatley caught my attention: that look of an opulent but mouldering Victorian book. I have occasionaly seen such things before, but never have I seen it done with such intricate flair – and carried thru' to the thumbnail galleries.
As for the images themselves: I've only viewed the first two pages so far, but have already been impressed by their imaginative spookyness & beautiful technique. At a glance they look like 19th century daguerreotypes or calotypes, but a closer look reveals dark contempary twists. I am reminded somewhat of those collages that Max Ernst made by cutting up & rearranging line drawings from Victorian catolouges, creating a surreal world of implied storys where the everyday meets the bizare, the present meets the past.
I was also reminded of the tales of Poe, his recurant theme of suddenly, unexpectedly & for no explicable reason, being thrown into a parrallel reality. I was interested to read, on another website, your remarks re the ideas behind The Darkhouse Quarter. Are the writings you speak of online any where?

Oh, I was also interested to read your remarks elsewhere on this forum *waves a paw in the general direction of the Digital Art section* about Wacom tabs; and will comment on this over there by & by…
_________________
"When it is dark enough you can see the stars"

[AlisonBC]

Welp, after reading the original post, the comment, and then the follow up reply, I have to confess I have completely lost the original point!

Art is whatever you make it. I think there are people with talent who don't use it, and there are people with very little talent who seem to do very well in the art world...beauty in the eye of the beholder maybe? I think it is possible to harness a basic ability to 'do' art and produce something quite wonderful; this is something I see every day with my own children. And I think it's possible to have a natural, raw, unabashed, amazing gobsmacking talent and have art just flow from your fingertips.

Natural, nutured; yes to both.

[Graphiteartist]

There is an artist in everyone just waiting for the oportunity to express it's self in whatever form, I am a part-time youth worker as well as an artist and part of my work is to stimulate these young people to express themselves in positive ways and I do this through art, and I find that when confronted with the chance to express their own thoughts in whatever creative style they like that the young people do it very, very well, and produce some great work.
So, yes, there is an artist in everyone, it just needs nurturing into existance or it just gets pushed into a little box somewhere in the sub-consious mind, to be forgotten about.

[EtherealMooncat]

Thanks for your reply Alison.

*mwahaha* Stage One of my feindish plot : to spread confusion amongst the Earthlings : is working. The time is ripe for Stage Two *shouts to halfwit henchcat* Igor! Prepare the Positronic Ray! *mwahahahaha*


It's interesting you should mention children in this context, as the aforementioned Research Project focused a lot on children / education, particularly re musical ability / reading & writing ability. They studied two different sample groups (one from an urban city in England, the other from a tribal village in Africa). By looking at the similarities & contrasts therof they uncovered fundamentals about the true nature of educational / creative development outside sociological preconceptions; which *KABOOOOM*…hang on a minute…….

Noooooo! Igor- you clot! I've told you before : it is vital to deactivate the bioradial subatomizer before engaging the magnoradized subpartical accelorater or the whole mechanism of the Positronic Ray will become unstable & explode. My feindish plot is ruined…. *weeps, smashes furniture over Igors head, etc, etc*
_________________
"When it is dark enough you can see the stars"

[EtherealMooncat]

Thanx for your comments Nige

With a bicrispid monzogulation that is nigh on proxlucid in its altrocity, I agree with your conclusion that "there is an artist in everyone, it just needs nurturing into existance or it just gets pushed into a little box somewhere in the sub-consious mind, to be forgotten about".
Interesting to hear that this view is backed up by your observations as youth worker...it sounds rather like Art Therapy the way you describe it.

BTW the draftsmanship on display in your online portfolio is most impressive!
_________________
"When it is dark enough you can see the stars"

[jaba]

[EtherealMooncat]

[william blake]

yes to talent, yes to genius......

genius makes a mockery of heirarchies.... genius is binary, genius or not...
therefore autonomous....only mediocrity seeks approval from an extrinsic structure.

like riding a bike, either spinning down a sweeping hill or lying flat on your back.