“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is a saying that is passed around, referenced, and re-referenced from time immemorial. It is true, there are those of us who can see, find, and “behold” beauty wherever we lay our eyes. This is nothing to do with perfection, but in seeing and finding that which pleases the “beholder’s” eyes. On the flip side there are also those who only see flaws, the negative, the unattractive in whatever or whoever they see. This is also having nothing to do with perfection, but in seeing and finding only what is ‘displeasing’ to the beholder’s eyes. The common denominator between both these aspects is that it is purely a reflection of the “beholder” and nothing to do with the “beheld”.
The arts, in my opinion face the same. There are those who find redeeming features in what they see, and those on the counter balance who cannot find anything redeeming in anything they see. Again, a psychologically driven negativity that one cannot comprehend. When we look at the performing arts encompassing theatre, film, and interpretive movement, I always think that appreciating effort, understanding that every production does not have millions of dollars to spend, and that every thespian is not a Sir Lawrence Olivier, makes appreciating what we see, in the nuanced world we live in, easier. The storylines, the scripts, the plot may not be fine-tuned and sophisticated, the performances may not be the “best” but unless one is expecting perfection (which does not exist) everywhere, there would still be elements that can be enjoyed.
With the visual arts this goes even wider, further and deeper. Man has been creating visual representations since the very beginning of recorded history. The Neanderthal Iberian cave art estimated to be around 64,000 years old, created by the forefathers of modern Man, depicts crude but almost melancholic imagery of the harsh world they lived in. An inhospitable world of mega-fauna and Sabre tooth tigers, they still wanted to surround their basic abodes with some visual ‘art’ representations. The famed cave paintings in Lascaux France are said to be around 36,000 years old, where we also see that Man has had the inbuilt urge to create, to share visually what they themselves beheld, in the most detailed manner, using the limited resources at their disposal. From here on it’s a wonderfully rich, mixed bag of cultures and civilizations where each, in their own right have gone on to show the real, imagined, and wished for world of their times.
Another turning point bridging the horrors of the dark ages with the sublime creativity we have come to appreciate, is the Renaissance. With the genius, of Filippo Brunelleschi, Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, and Sandro Botticelli to name a few, the known world was awash with beauty, grace, and refinement in the visual, which was never to be forgotten. Sometimes very little is known about their personal lives, but the legacy of beauty they left behind, still has us all inspired and in awe. The list goes on as the chronological progression to the modern day continues, but there was never a shortage of beauty to behold. That is of course, if one is willing to open one’s eyes, mind and soul to see and appreciate it.
Today we live in times of ‘critics. Art critics, theatre critics, clown critics, juggler critics, you name it, there will be a slew of critics to pass judgement. If one is opening up one’s creativity to a general audience, one should be prepared for opinions, yay and nay Sayers, but the key factor for me, is the qualifications these ‘critics’ have to ‘critique’ anything! Having been to a few exhibits, being able to hold a pencil or a marker, being apt at computer aided drawing tools, and knowing a few artists, or “artsy” types is by no means a qualifier to critique.
Wearing some mish-mashed getup, making an effort to look unkept, carrying straw bags, and wearing tribal or ethnic jewelry has become the “look” du-jour of these so called ‘art-types’. As if trying to prove to the world that they are too cerebral to bother with what, in their minds, the ‘superficial’ fashion world dictates. Style is personal and one has the freedom to wear what one pleases, but looking like one has never seen a hair care tool or product, or a bar of soap, is just not acceptable. So, these pseudo-eccentrics, who are far from eccentric and are just calculated in their mercenary love for money and spewing negative comments, wear the ‘garb’ of ‘shabby chic’ and are just shabby and far from chic!
These are the vile tongued, poison penned critics who go to galleries, and exhibits to simply take a disproportionately gleeful opportunity to be mean spirited, and tear a creative individual down. Also, with the ability to hide behind a screen when being negative, gives them the opportunity to take it to the lowest levels possible. We know so many out there who feign sophistication by attempting to be blasé about anything and everything they see. Show them the Sistine chapel at the Vatican, they will claim their neighborhood muralist can do the same, show them Da Vinci’s ‘Adoration of the Magi’ at the gallery Uffizi outside Florence, and they will compare it to a cartoon they saw in a local newspaper, show them the Pieta by Michelangelo, and they will say it looks like any death scene in their city adjacent hospital. This is not sophistication and far from an art aficionado, this is plain bitterness, and lack of anything nice to say.
Taking it a step further we have the ‘curators’ who should not be allowed to curate a 1st grade children’s art exhibition, setting up collections from visiting artists and brilliant creators. These ‘curators’ who in reality would not be allowed to plan, and ‘curate’ the vegetable aisle at a supermarket, use a few big names, big words, and usually their boldness to misrepresent, to climb to the heights of artistic management, and the in doing so end up at the lowest of the moral and ethical compasses. Those who are impressed by them need their own values examined, and those who give them massive budgets to ‘curate’ collections should be examined and put on display themselves!
It could be that we were raised differently, and it could be that we still have reality etched into our mindset where we cannot fathom the levels of delusion the world has sunk to. One can say one does not like something personally, one can also love something personally, but to throw blanket statements impugning a creative personality purely based on ones own (usually misguided) judgement? That is just plain sad. Let the creatives create, let the beholders behold, and to each and every one of us, enjoy, or not, as that is why we are individuals. Part 2 to follow.
