Embedded Files
(see: geodesic_eye, 03-11-11)
QUERENT: Here's a question: Is writing haiku a fine art, or is it an illustrative art? If the former, it would be judged by its aesthethic appeal and "meaninglessness" (in the most positive sense). If an illustrative art, then its message would be carefully scripted to "sell" an idea to the public.
My question arose after reading this interesting viwepoint, thanks to a post bt Karen Cesar. http://marlenemountain.org/essays/essay_plighthaiku.html Individually, we are at various stages in our development as poets, critics, and readers of haiku. When we come upon those who do not write, think, or feel as we do, we can say that they don't understand haiku. Or we can wait a bit. For each of us has a role which is, perhaps, the mos...
November 3, 2011 at 6:15pm · Like ·
MEMBER: for me it only illlustrated what i am seeing or feeling?
QUERENT: Interesting, . I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to the question I asked :) You have a question mark .....?
I'd say this, that making marks (and so on) on a support medium can be employed for many purposes. And, each of the purposes can cross-reference. For example, an advert (illustration of an intent to pressure sales in volume) for Astpartame could employ a Cubist purity feeling (despite the fact that that sweetener is a totally toxic substance but worth an awful lot of money annually around the world). Conversely, Andy Warhol employed graphic design to create what is certainly fine art (he was on top of his commercial art (graphics) game drawing shoes out of NYC and then went off and cracked the fine art game wide open, for more than 15 minutes, and by intent). Let's do an infotainment diagram/mind-map for this. It's an important understanding. . . .
QUERENT: I'd say so - yes, I'd say so. That's why I asked the question :) There is such a fine line, and to make one mis-step will push something either into the puke- can, or lift it up into the lofty arches of the cathedral. Fine art can never be vomit, IMHO, even if it depicts vomit. But something that is sugar coated (like Aspartamine) can be enticing - and ultimately reveal itself as nothing more than vomit. If one creates something as a "therapy" or as an "purging" of ones soul, then it cannot be fine art.
I think graphic design can be employed as fine art (Warhol/jp). Furthermore, fine art is clearly used to sell consumer items and other propaganda. Some of the finest art objects of all time (Sistine Chapel/Lascaux) have served the church and the temple and the military-industrial complexes of the big national gangsters of history. It's all in the intent, maybe. After that we consider a piece's merit as an example of execution skills.
QUERENT: Not much to add to what I have already said from my position. I don't think Michaelangelo intended his creations to serve any commercial interests, although I have read that he apparently was very unhappy about some of the political motives of his patrons. Artists need to feed themselves too -often unwillingly, at the price of selling a piece of their souls. I love Warhol's work, but do not think of it as fine art. He didn't pretend he was a fine artist, either, although his work now is shown in fine art galleries around the world. This is not a "which is better or worse" question ... it is about recognising something for what it is. The duck thing, you know. Ducks have certain characteristics that differ from say, swans, and that is important to know if one wants to keep the recipe classic! My personal preference is to consider haiku as a fine art, and to experiment within the defining parameters of the discipline.
Just for continuity of this thread, my reply to member's post above, and on her fb:
Thanks for your very thoughtful response! For me "fine art" and "illustrative art" are diametrically opposed (although they be on the same "art" continuum). I guess my personal ideal is to move towards creating fine art - that is, not scripted to contain a message for the public, and judged purely for its aesthetic appeal. Any meanings will then be attributed solely by the reader. But, I certainly do understand that we all follow our own bliss, and that along the way to the goal we aspire to, many of our creations will miss the mark. Sure, writing haiku can fulfil any of our personal needs - including being a therapeutic or a spiritual process, amongst others. My question was specific, asking if haiku is considered to be a fine art, or an illustrative (graphic/commercial) art? Sometimes there is no live bird waiting to become a self-fulling prophecy; the bird is either dead or it is alive! I take a stance, have an opinion, but this may also change if change is more adaptive. For me fine art "shows", and illustrative art "tells"; but that is just my current opinion :)
I also agree that most of us will continue to be students for years and years. However, there are others for whom writing haiku comes absolutely naturally, and who quickly become masters without trying. Reading their work is like gazing at a fine painting and being transported into another realm! Oh that we were all that gifted and could only leave things of beauty and inspiration behind :) OSHO, whose thoughts I don't always see eye to eye with, suggested that if we don't create something with love, or we create as a therapy, then we should burn our creations as they are nothing less than vomit. I do agree with that. Objects created in the process of therapy are not intended for public consumption - unless we are unconcerned about polluting the environment with the muck of our psyches! However, when something is created with love, and mindfully, even when it is not perfect, it will be recognised as such.
Great de Beers commercial - of course diamond are forever; and so is the BIg Hole in Kimberley, South Africa, where de Beers started out digging for them!! As evocative as the commercial is, I think of this as commercial art - playing on emotion and using the objects of fine art to sell a product. rather than the commercial being a fine art in and of itself :) It serves its purpose well though ....:)
haiku crossroads This is where we need to acknowledge that haiku is driven by a *special engine*.
QUERENT: Well, go ahead and tie it all up, John :)
"This is where we need to acknowledge that haiku is driven by a *special engine*."
We go to the pine to become the pine. Similarly, we go to the peak to dig the view. A peak, if flattened, becomes the centre. From this centre we are at the seed-place. The pine's heart's core. Its DNA program.
If we run this through haiku what do we find? We find, at the peak, at the centre and at the heart's core - a seed. Haiku's DNA.
Haiku's DNA is not exclusive to haiku. [This needs to be firmly understood, inwardly digested and acted upon.]
That is what we mean when we say: "haiku is driven by a *special engine*.
All that remains is for this critical statement to be unpacked and extrapolated. . . .
jp
November 5, 2011 at 2:30am
—
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse