Dealing with Artistic Concepts in Nonconceptual States
"What it leads to is a vision of art as a cynical manipulation of symbols and referents alone" - I like to work with symbols, not as a referent, but as a channel in which everything occurs what is present in this very moment.
This way i can be totally personal and universal at once, because i feel a direct CONNECTION to what i do, and what i do is touch the world and getting touched by the world at the same time, whatever that world in a specific place or time is.
Understanding the after WWII artist as a conceptual engineer usually implies that concepts, which define our perceptional perspective, are bricks of the arty houses, we built. But these houses shouldn't be objects as artworks, rather the focus should be on the subjective, personal experience we can have spending some time inside of them. If someone believes, that concepts provide experiences, than there is a total misunderstanding of human existence at all.
In fact, this very belief in concepts is still hanging in the roots of WWII, which had led us into great misery. The belief in concepts in art all in all is an unreflected approach of hiding ourselves in an artistic black box - as if we would assign our own gift of creativity to a technological solution.
So, if we take symbols to rearrange them in a somewhat conceptual way, we may inhibit ourselves to go BEYOND them, tear them back to their root. And their root is the connection to our work we get to feel as a craftsman.
We can say, there are two categories of artists: conceptual and nonconceptual. But in this categorial thinking we deny, that a concept only arises in a nonconceptual state. We can choose: a) believe in that concept and lose the connection to its root, the nonconceptual state of creation, the experience, maybe by categorizing it as “relational aestheticism" b) recognize the concept as an alterable appearance in the nonconceptual state and working with that as a craftsman, whereas the craft is related to consciousness in the flow of experience rather then to any sense of perfection understood in a conceptual way.
==
This text is related to a blog entry by Derek Holzer -
http://macumbista.net/?p=1833
- and inspired by a talk with Candice O' Denver -
http://greatfreedom.org/Downloads/Human_Identity_Summit/Audio/7_22_10%20The%20Song%20of%20Clarity.mp3
This way i can be totally personal and universal at once, because i feel a direct CONNECTION to what i do, and what i do is touch the world and getting touched by the world at the same time, whatever that world in a specific place or time is.
Understanding the after WWII artist as a conceptual engineer usually implies that concepts, which define our perceptional perspective, are bricks of the arty houses, we built. But these houses shouldn't be objects as artworks, rather the focus should be on the subjective, personal experience we can have spending some time inside of them. If someone believes, that concepts provide experiences, than there is a total misunderstanding of human existence at all.
In fact, this very belief in concepts is still hanging in the roots of WWII, which had led us into great misery. The belief in concepts in art all in all is an unreflected approach of hiding ourselves in an artistic black box - as if we would assign our own gift of creativity to a technological solution.
So, if we take symbols to rearrange them in a somewhat conceptual way, we may inhibit ourselves to go BEYOND them, tear them back to their root. And their root is the connection to our work we get to feel as a craftsman.
We can say, there are two categories of artists: conceptual and nonconceptual. But in this categorial thinking we deny, that a concept only arises in a nonconceptual state. We can choose: a) believe in that concept and lose the connection to its root, the nonconceptual state of creation, the experience, maybe by categorizing it as “relational aestheticism" b) recognize the concept as an alterable appearance in the nonconceptual state and working with that as a craftsman, whereas the craft is related to consciousness in the flow of experience rather then to any sense of perfection understood in a conceptual way.
==
This text is related to a blog entry by Derek Holzer -
http://macumbista.net/?p=1833
- and inspired by a talk with Candice O' Denver -
http://greatfreedom.org/Downloads/Human_Identity_Summit/Audio/7_22_10%20The%20Song%20of%20Clarity.mp3
tellerwaescher - 25. Nov, 10:48
