Something I've always found foundationally significant about art is that it provides an avenue to explore meaning outside of "real life." Art is useless and that's the source of the freedom it gives us. I've always been skeptical about blending the line between art and life. Making art we can take great "risks" because they are metaphoric or symbolic. They do not harm anyone. Often those blending that line are looking for ways to abuse without responsibility. Jacob Grossberg, my old teacher, always said, "In art I can do what I want; but I'm not killing anybody." Having escaped the Holocaust as a child and drafted into the Korean War, he knew all about the other kinds of activities.
The doula idea sounds really promising! It could be a way of providing the kind of insulation from life-consequences that art gives. As with art, in ceremony; as you find in rituals that let us explore psychological states without harming or being harmed; there is a means of removing potentially risky actions from real life.
We all need to have ways to be able to make leaps that take us out of our stereo-typical thoughts and behaviors. That can happen in art or within a ritualized setting without the risk of harming others. Of course, the artist, or the initiate, is risking themselves; but that is our own decision about our own life, attention, situation.
thank you Tony, as ever for a thoughtful and thought-inspiring comment. I hadn't considered before that art is useless and therefore freeing. I think it reflects the values of our society that we consign art to uselessness - eg not utilitarian, not money-making (except when it is co-opted into the market system) - whereas inner reflection offers a different kind of usefulness, if one values inner reflection and enrichment in and of itself. I like the idea of its freedom - and can see the parallels to madness, of course.
I'm also intrigued by the idea of art allowing risk. I remember many years ago holding a conference about risk in children's play, and how our culture tries to eradicate risk. Do we go too far trying to control or contain outcomes? And how much, in what ways do we tolerate harm in our societies. Harm is an inevitable aspect of life, but I agree there are people who use harm deliberately as a tool or weapon to wield power over others, whether it is through the threat of harm or the harm itself.
I will sit with these thoughts and hopefully write more in a post when I have sifted through. xxx Julia
Your point about risk brings us to a question I've been looking at for a while. Harm is inevitable. There's something strange about the ways we are encouraged to be both risk-averse and to be blind to serious risks that we then expose ourselves to without concern. There's also the way, as survivors of abuse and as witnesses to so much destruction; we are just tired of harm. This is all more than can fit into a comment. I hope to be writing an essay on on this soon.
Julia,
Something I've always found foundationally significant about art is that it provides an avenue to explore meaning outside of "real life." Art is useless and that's the source of the freedom it gives us. I've always been skeptical about blending the line between art and life. Making art we can take great "risks" because they are metaphoric or symbolic. They do not harm anyone. Often those blending that line are looking for ways to abuse without responsibility. Jacob Grossberg, my old teacher, always said, "In art I can do what I want; but I'm not killing anybody." Having escaped the Holocaust as a child and drafted into the Korean War, he knew all about the other kinds of activities.
The doula idea sounds really promising! It could be a way of providing the kind of insulation from life-consequences that art gives. As with art, in ceremony; as you find in rituals that let us explore psychological states without harming or being harmed; there is a means of removing potentially risky actions from real life.
We all need to have ways to be able to make leaps that take us out of our stereo-typical thoughts and behaviors. That can happen in art or within a ritualized setting without the risk of harming others. Of course, the artist, or the initiate, is risking themselves; but that is our own decision about our own life, attention, situation.
Tony
thank you Tony, as ever for a thoughtful and thought-inspiring comment. I hadn't considered before that art is useless and therefore freeing. I think it reflects the values of our society that we consign art to uselessness - eg not utilitarian, not money-making (except when it is co-opted into the market system) - whereas inner reflection offers a different kind of usefulness, if one values inner reflection and enrichment in and of itself. I like the idea of its freedom - and can see the parallels to madness, of course.
I'm also intrigued by the idea of art allowing risk. I remember many years ago holding a conference about risk in children's play, and how our culture tries to eradicate risk. Do we go too far trying to control or contain outcomes? And how much, in what ways do we tolerate harm in our societies. Harm is an inevitable aspect of life, but I agree there are people who use harm deliberately as a tool or weapon to wield power over others, whether it is through the threat of harm or the harm itself.
I will sit with these thoughts and hopefully write more in a post when I have sifted through. xxx Julia
Julia,
Your point about risk brings us to a question I've been looking at for a while. Harm is inevitable. There's something strange about the ways we are encouraged to be both risk-averse and to be blind to serious risks that we then expose ourselves to without concern. There's also the way, as survivors of abuse and as witnesses to so much destruction; we are just tired of harm. This is all more than can fit into a comment. I hope to be writing an essay on on this soon.
Thank you for your response.
Tony
This strikes me as a thoroughly interesting idea Julia! Well worth investigating. Keep up the good work.
thank you! I will see if I can take it any further. xxx