gh comments:
I believe that all art is based in the language function of the brain. I also think that the cognitive sciences are having a profound effect on our understanding of art. As a corollary I think that the form of religion, the creation of the god myths throughout the world comes from two separate survival instincts in humans. One is the ability to believe that something is there even though we can't see it. This is pretty handy when tracking animals on a hunt or hearing a noise in the trees and understanding it might be an animal about to attack you. The other part of the brain that is reasoning always attaches a causal relationship to events even if one is not there. God exists even though we can't see him/her. Anyway, Art and aesthetics are abstract functions of language. They are "word games" ala Wittgenstein on a certain level. BUt I also believe that artists are experimenters. They make things and do things because they want to see what will happen. An artist usually doesn't know the outcome of their creative process. They try to surprise themselves. This surprise is the basis of creativity. It's quite different from craft or design where the outcome is known and the process is one of advancing to the already known outcome. This is one of the basic problems with art in a capitalist society. Commodities have to be known, fixed and quantifiable in order to be given value so they can be bought and sold. The more there is a fixed outcome for an artwork the easier to attach a value to it but the less creative experimentation is involved in the process. Considering the topic of art as a social process and a group/community effort that point of view and process, engages the language function and also spurs on creative experimentation for members of the group. I always find that group collaborations strecth my point of view and open up news ways of perceiving things and methods of making art. By the way, the other discussion of art as a part of religion is bogus. religions go to artists and architects and ask them to come up with a language or composition that somehow expresses the unknowable of their religious dogma. Art is external to religion it doesn't come from religion or a religious impulse.
On Jul 4, 2010, at 9:36 PM, Yunzi Li wrote:

or him, everything is translation, which is closely related to his view that seeing actions as manipulation in "Grammars of creation". Isn't it?

G.H. Hovagimyan
http://nujus.net/~gh
http://artistsmeeting.org
http://turbulence.org/Works/plazaville






_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre

Reply via email to