Before we proceed a word of warning: this post is of somewhat extensive length, so those of you who have a fashionably Limited Attention Span might as well scamper off now. Go on off you go, shoo, shoo…
To those of you who are still here: I bid you Welcome! Have a coffee, you'll need it to stay awake to the end!
I know what your thinking: 'that opening paragraph was a bit harsh'. Well maybe.But I have my reputation as a Sour Puss to maintain innit.
And so, without further ado, on to the Main Feature…
*cue sound of large gong as the curtain rises*
ARTISTIC TALENT : THE GIFTED FEW?
Some Musings on wether Artistic Ability is A Gift given to the Choosen Few, or a Latent Potential Inherant in Everyone. Including Divers Remarks on the Role of the Artist in Society, which altho' Initialy Relevant end up Wandering Down to Tangent Town & Dropping into a Bar for a Few Drinks. Or Something.
Firstly, when I say 'artistic' I mean in the broad sense of the term, not just the visual arts but Music, Literature, Performance and such…and not just 'Fine Art' but Illustration, Folk Art, Street Art and wot-not. Maybe 'creative' would be a better word.
From what I've observed the General Concensus seems to lean towards the 'Gift of the Few' Theory. Personaly I lean more towards the other view. What do you think?
Of course, there are some factors which lend weight to Gift Theory. Wether we regard such a notion as a fact, or in the interest of open-mindedness merely aknoweledge it as a possibility, we could go on to debate wether this 'gift' is down to Nature or Nurture until the cows come home, flop down in their armchairs with a weary sigh, crack open a beer and settle down in front of the TV to watch 'The X Factor' or some such tripe.
I did briefly consider enumerating the 'evidence' for the Gift Theory, but on reflection I'm not gonna bother. Firstly 'cos, as sophisticated artsy dudes, you're probably well aware of them already; and secondly 'cos like most cats I'm a lazy feck.*stops typing & spends next 2 hours lounging about and washing behind ears (quite unessacerily 'cos they were perfectly clean to start with) in a laconic stylii*
Far better methinks to leave that to Someone Else who takes that view. Besides, as I suspect the Gift Theory to be a Big Bag of Bobbins I probably wouldn't do it justice. If you, Dear Reader, are one of them there Someone Elses: go ahead and make your case. My opinions aren't set in stone, you might convince me.
I have to admit, part of my tendency towards the 'Latent Potential in Everyone' Theory (erk, a somewhat cumbersome title, lets refer to it henceforth as the Pook Theory. There's absoloutly no logical reason for this but it is, you must admit, a lot more compact. And it sounds kinda cute… Anyway where was I… oh yeah… my pref for the Pook Theory…) is rooted in my subjective / emotional attitudes. I have a certain distaste for elitism. Elitism leads to Heiararchies, Heiararchies lead to Established Social Order, Established Social Order leads to Authority and I have an inherant suspicion of Authority.
Which brings us round to the tricksy subject of the role of the artist in society. The work of a French sociologist called Pierre Bordieu is rather illuminating here. He came to some very interesting & perceptive conclusions about the fabric of society & how that fabric is perpetuated by means of what he refered to as field, habitus, symbolic violence and…oh, it's a subject in itself… if your interested there's a good intro to his work here [link]
Curiously enough, the person who first introduced me to this Bourdieu dude was citing his writings as a Justification of artistic elites. From what I've subsequently read it seems to me that if anything his work does quite the Reverse! As a sociologist he postulated the aforementioned concepts as objective observations on society, but avoided attaching value judgements therof. If you concede that sociology is a valid science then this Spockesque detachment is a commendable stance for a scientist. However, as an individual Bourdieu was a left-wing activist who used his sociological discoveries / theories to further the cause of workers rights / civil liberties. In other words to expose & undermine (public & hidden) elites (from a Political Perspective).
I don't want to get sucked into politics here, so – from an Artistic Perspective: surely one of the crucial roles of the artist in society (especialy during the last 150 years) has been to stand on the border between Society and the Wilderness and thrust a Stick into the Spokes of the Bicycle Wheel of Established Order, thus sending the smug Cyclist of Elitism flying over the metaphorical handlebars? Dada anyone?
Hmmm, time to mozzy on back to the main topic I think.
Perhaps true 'genius' is a rare & mysterious thing. I'm not sure. But I suspect that Everyone has the Seed of Immense Creative Potential. And also the potential for a perceptive awareness that can step outside the social conditioning of Mainstream Culture (which says yer can't start a sentence with 'and' but I just did so Ha!) It's just a question of how deeply that Seed is buried; and of – if it is brought near enough to the surface to sprout – whether it is nurtured & encouraged to grow towards it's full potential. Of course, this is a subjective opinion, it doesn't lend any real weight of 'proof' to the Pook Theory. And so for years the General Concensus pooh-poohed the Pook. *narrows eyes & glowers malevolently at the General Concensus*
But then, a few years ago I heard by chance a radio prog about a big research project that some Music Dept Uni Boffins had undertaken to resolve the question: is the concept that (musical) talent is the preserve of a gifted elite a Fact or an erroneous Sociological Belief. Their methods were rather interesting & their results made some profound points about both Art and Society. So what did they discover?...
*pauses for dramatic, cliffhanger type effect*
Find out in the second Vaguely Interesting installment of 'Artistic Talent : The Gifted Few?' Or not. I mean, maybe nobody who has read this gives two hoots what they discovered. In which case it's hardly worth the trouble of me going into it innit! Or perhaps you know already. In which case ditto.
Actualy, is anyone still reading this!?? It has rather gone on a bit. In fact, all this typing is making my fingers hurt (awww, pawr ickle me)……
*Winks & vanishes in a Wisp of Egalitarianism*
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
etherealmooncat's journal
</a> 
curious