The significance of a work of art

The thing most talked about regarding any work of art, in the population at large, is its SIGNIFICANCE.

By that I mean its meaning. What does it mean? What is it about?

People look at a painting or a sculpture and say to each other: "What does he MEAN?"

It is also the thing most likely to be discussed in educational institutions. Long, involved discussions of the author's intent and the symbolisms of the work will take place in classrooms, often to the dismay of students who think that perhaps there is not always a single correct answer.

But regarding significance I will say now that it is not really that important.

Sure, it is not exactly unimportant either. Let's right away get used to a long, sliding scale of importance here. There are many grades of it, like there is of anything, nothing is black and white. And a scale is often longer than one realizes, a thing can be very important indeed, for instance, and still have another thing be very much more important.

A good significance to a work of art can be a great thing. And one can get a lot of pleasure by thinking and talking about it. But it is NOT the essential part of the work of art. If it was, it would no longer be art, but an essay, or journalism.

As I talk about elsewhere, the essential part of art is the creation of something new. That is why artists are also known as creators. If a creation is 100% about something pre-existing, it is not really something new, is it?

The reason I am stressing this, is that I myself have sometimes gotten trapped in non-production by getting desperate about the all-important significance of what I was doing. And I have seen a lot of very fine artists get all bogged down and lose the raw power of their earlier work, because they so badly wanted to make the most important work they could, and they thought this was about the significance of the work. So they start diving into the things that affect them the strongest personally, often meaning their own past and personal problems, and they lose the interest of the audience.

Listen, forget about all that. If you have a great idea with a lot of meaning, by all means use it. Otherwise just use your good old playfulness and do something fun. The aesthetics and the "interestingness" of your work will make people happier and more extroverted (looking outwards), and they will be able to make their own observations and conclusions, which is usually more healthy and durable than any used opinion they can take over from anybody else.

A lot of great art is totally abstract, with no thought from the artist about anything it was supposed to say about the "real" world. (Who decides what is real anyway?) It may be that is "says something" in any case, but maybe that "something" can only be expressed as art, yes?

And a lot of the best art is simply made with a lot of nonsence. You look at a picture or listen to a song, and it makes you feel great, and you don't care why.

Another thing is that you will find that you can hardly stop people from putting significance into your work. So why work so hard yourself at doing so? Relax and let them. People love to contribute, just try and stop them. And who cares whether it has any relation to anything you may have seen or put into it yourself? Freedom of Art is also freedom for the receiver.

back I mail