Tuesday 22 September 2015

Life and Art

Writing is not easy. The trouble is, I’m too full of ideas. They come in bunches and I don’t know quite what to do with them. My monkey-mind thinks they should be cut into neat shapes and sewn into a quilt for posterity, so I spend hours trying to fit them together like a jigsaw puzzle. The task becomes sickening, for it’s a little crazy. A sensible person would write about one thing at a time, but as John Muir said, “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.” And now I feel the urge to research Muir and discover whether he was sensible, or a bit like me. I’ve always been like this. “Mr Mulder, you have a butterfly mind,” said my tutor in Italian, Dr Carsaniga. I’m tempted to take a walk in the rain, and let it wash away these words.

There’s another way, as taught by Natalie Goldberg in her shot at Zen-in-the-art-of-authory, Writing Down the Bones:
If you give your mind too much time to contemplate a beginning when you sit down to write, your monkey mind might meander over many topics and never quite get to putting a word on the page. . . [A] list . . . helps to activate your writing quickly and cut through resistance. Naturally once you begin writing you might be surprised where your mind takes the topic. That’s good. You are not trying to control your writing. You are stepping out of the way. Keep your hand moving.
To which I am tempted to say “Thanks, Natalie. That’s the easy part.” Perhaps that’s why I find myself stuck at an early chapter of her book, finding excuses all the time not to read on—to the parts which might really confront my inadequacy. In any case I can’t see myself like an eager student in class, taking notes and doing every exercise she sets. I’m too old to follow anyone or learn new tricks. What works for me are little phrases sent by an angel-messenger, either directly to my unconscious mind or through other people, such as these:
One of the things I like about this post is that you let your guard down in places. . . . some people hide behind studded leather jackets. (Bob)

my work [i.e. my art] IS me and so it does matter if it stands still, doesn't evolve. (Natalie d’Arbeloff)
Yes, so maybe I should be less guarded, blur the distinction between the self and its productions. Which gave rise to the idea that one’s “me” is multi-layered. Everything one displays to the world is what you may call one’s art, which also acts as a guard to protect the more sensitive layers that lie within. So, for one person the outer layer is art in the conventional sense, for she has studied drawing and painting over a lifetime. In another it’s her care to be soignée when she goes out. She’s paid attention to her nails, hair, clothes, shoes, the way she carries herself. This outer layer could be art, or it could be a bony carapace which stops us evolving, unless we are prepared, from time to time, to cast off the exoskeleton and let it wash up on the tideline along with everyone else’s flotsam.

Writing a non-fiction blog centred on the pronoun “I”—as I do—one does need to keep up one’s guard, both for appearance’ sake and the sense of safety. In the marketplace, nakedness is not becoming. One’s productions are careful constructs. Perhaps they are separate creations like a suit of armour loosely modelled on the human form. If we are more daring they may be skintight and revealing. Either way, we must shed the old skin if we want to grow. To others, the “new” person emerging from underneath will closely resemble the old one; just a little fresher, maybe. The old one will be left behind on the tideline, for Time to dispose as it sees fit. And what is the cast-off skin? It has my DNA, but is dead, destined to fossildom or dust. “Fingernails are human too, but they don’t have rights,” says John Myste, long-time visitor to this site, offering me another thought about the relation of “my art” to “me”. [link here]

Another writer who’s taught me recently is Nicholson Baker, in his novel The Anthologist:
If you have something to say, say it. Don’t save it up. Don’t think to yourself, I’m going to build up to the truth I really want to say.
Easier said than done, and written by its author as much-needed advice to self.

I have left it till last, I’m afraid, but here is what I have to say, as triggered by Natalie G, Natalie D’A, Bob (aka Rob), John and Nicholson:

Instead of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, as jotted by Thomas Jefferson in the middle of a war while thinking about what his side was fighting for, and what it would do post-victory, I’d propose different ideals:
—that we each and everyone be conscious artists, painting our existence on to the canvas of each new day
—that we let happiness pursue us, and don’t wait for the current war to be won. Life is too short.

23 Comments:

At 22 September 2015 at 20:49 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

Vincent, thank you, I'm flattered to be quoted, of course!

The ideals you propose above are fine advice. The perennial problem is that it's easier to read, or write, good precepts than to follow them consistently day to day. My life-long notebooks are full of resolutions, analyses and advice I give myself for resolving every conceivable problem or removing every possible inner block. In reality, problems and blocks will keep on popping up here and there, that's their nature. And in reality we usually deal with them, or don't deal with them, as the moment dictates. Just as "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', fine precepts on paper or carved in stone, but rarely achieved in history.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 06:45 , Anonymous Bryan White said...

"—that we each and everyone be conscious artists, painting our existence on to the canvas of each new day
—that we let happiness pursue us, and don’t wait for the current war to be won. Life is too short."

I love it.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 07:01 , Anonymous Bryan White said...

By the way, and this has nothing to really do with anything, but I was thumbing through one of my textbooks and I came across a painting called "My Egypt" by Charles Demuth that I could have sworn -- no, I'll say flat out that I KNOW -- that I've seen it before. This seemed like the most likely place I would seen it, so I figured I'd ask when and where you might have lodged this image in my brain.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 09:55 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Glad you like it, Bryan. I had intended a more intensive attack on ‘life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness’ but thought I might be investigated for unamerican activities.

I'd never seen the painting before, though TinEye records 118 instances of it on the Web. Apparently it's of grain silos. The only similar thing I've shown here is in this post http://perpetual-lab.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/witchcraft_10.html which showed some tanks for storing chemicals at a pharmaceutical factory.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 09:58 , Anonymous Nelson said...

No flattery intended, Natalie!

Over at your place I said “you have the knack always to inspire. Not in this case any comment, just an improvisation on your theme, as in my latest.” This post is the result. The improvisation was to add variations to your theme, with “It ain’t necessarily so” as a melody in counterpoint.

My first thought was “Nobody can say ‘my art is me’”, but that doesn’t work because you did say it and I don’t doubt your truthfulness. Many other artists have too. Fernando Pessoa, whom as you know I definitely do admire (as opposed to authors of other books I may mention), said “I am, in large measure, the selfsame prose I write.”

So I wondered how you could be right without making me wrong, when I think that art and artist are necessarily quite different, and ought to keep at a healthy distance from one another.

This gave rise to the notion of layers of self. Bob, who I know as Rob, speaks about how we display a public persona to protect our more sensitive parts. It gave me the idea of art as an outer layer: “this is the me that I show to the world”. I argue that it is not the whole me, but comparable to an exoskeleton which gets discarded. So when you spoke of evolving, I thought of shells including crab shells washed up on the beach. They once were part of the sea creature, but they were outgrown. Someone else might pick them up and find them pretty, or they may just get pounded by the waves and turn to sand.

So they may outlive us, or we may outlive them. Such are the thoughts your recent posts have inspired. No advice is involved. I’m not good at taking it or dishing it out. We’ve got far more of it than we can possibly use, I’m completely in accord with you there. But when something resonates with me, it might hit someone else the same way.

I had a strong feeling that the artist, while a special kind of person, is the same as everyone else for we can all be artists in the presentation of our outer layers applying all the skill we know. And that the essence of this everyday art, such as dressing up to go out, is interaction between self and other. It is not us but our “second skin”.

Says Wikipedia, helpfully: “A membrane is a selective barrier; it allows some things to pass through but stops others.”

 
At 23 September 2015 at 10:02 , Anonymous Nelson said...

It could have also added that what passes through the membrane is of course a two-way traffic, as happens with our skin.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 10:55 , Anonymous Bob said...

A very interesting post and I take your point about wearing clothes at the market!
I believe you like Nina Simone and Leonard Cohen......both of whom have a knack of letting their guard down when they sing. I guess they weren't so good at letting their guard down in other situations though. Nina certainly had her problems in relationships.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 12:03 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

Vincent, thanks for this elucidation. What I meant by "advice" in my last comment was the last paragraph in your last post, the fine ideals you listed, which I admire and share. But what I meant was that I have rarely been able to follow the good advice I've given myself (written in notebooks over a lifetime) because actual responses to events and day to day situations are often quite different to what we think we think (if that makes any sense). Good intentions/resolutions/precepts/ideals, in history and in individual lives, are more often abandoned or re-written than they are followed.

"I had a strong feeling that the artist, while a special kind of person, is the same as everyone else.."
Absolutely agree, and I'd add that any 'specialness' an artist may have is no more special than that of any other individual. When I replied to you (at my blog) saying "my work is me" I meant that if I make things that may be called "art" they're simply like the apples on an apple tree: the products of that particular tree. I can't separate one from the other. While not being necessarily autobiographical, I can't remove my literal and metaphorical fingerprints from any artwork I make. So it's not to far-fetched to say that the work is me. And since this tree grows in this specific orchard at this specific time, and the gardener is also me, the job involves keeping the applest growing and tasting as good as possible.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 19:53 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Yes I do like both those singers, Bob, and often play the Leonard Cohen album you gave me. I had to buy Nina Simone CDs for myself. I'm intrigued by the suggestion that (a) not being good at letting one's guard down may contribute to (b) problematic relationships. If I ask you to let your guard down enough to give examples of (a) and (b), will that make our relationship, such as it is, problematic? A rhetorical question, I hasten to add.



 
At 23 September 2015 at 20:36 , Anonymous Nelson said...

We seem to have reached accord on all points, Natalie. Your point that “actual responses to events and day to day situations are often quite different to what we think we think” is well made indeed. As you point out, we can't even successfully advise ourselves, let alone others.

Good art, I’m sure we agree, comes from more than mere skill. It reflects the integrity and other personal qualities of the artist. A Bramley tree will produce Bramley apples. The gardener need only prune, fertilize, deter pests & harvest. Nature does the rest.

Now I find myself wondering what it means in everyday existence to practise such ideals as being an artist in one's own life.

And how we can let happiness pursue us, even while the “war”, or our unresolved problems, has yet to be won?

I’m advising myself, as I write this, to ponder these matters, be my own guinea-pig and write a new post.

 
At 23 September 2015 at 22:12 , Anonymous Bryan White said...

I think you're both presenting valid ways of looking at art. Vincent is presenting it as a face we display to the world, an "outer shell." Writing, like acting or dancing ir singing, or even painting or sculpting, can be viewed in a sense as a performance. And as a performance, yes, it's carefully crafted and stylised into something appealing. But there's a double edge to this. Things can be hidden AND revealed in this crafting. A dancer, for instance, may display great depths of emotions unhinted at in their daily movements when their just "being themselves" and walking down the street, even though there's a far more conscious effort to appear graceful on the stage.

Natalie, on the other hand, is presenting art as something that an artist produces, like fruit from a tree. This is also a valid conception. An artist begets their art, almost like a child, and it isn't just about displaying yourself in your art, any more that in just about displaying yourself in your child. There's an element of that, of course, but there's also that joy in just having given life to something. And the thing to remember is that the apple doesn't just come FROM the tree; the apples is also a part OF the tree, every bit as much as the branches or the leaves. So, in that sense, an artist is perfectly justified in saying that their art is them. It's a part of that ever growing, branching tree made up of our acts and deeds and the sum total of all the little details that make us who we are. Who can I be said to be if I'm not made up from the way that I snore when I sleep, the look I get on my face when I'm lying, the way I usually spend the holidays, the times I've been nice, the times I've been angry, the times I've been cruel? And if all these things are me, then why not the words I've written as well?

 
At 24 September 2015 at 10:55 , Anonymous ellie Clayton said...

Art is the authentic outer manifestation of the inner life, displaying reason, emotion and/or spirit to the senses.

I hope this sounds like a distillation and not a pronouncement.

 
At 24 September 2015 at 13:02 , Anonymous ellie Clayton said...

A friend Henry Mitchell made an apropos comment on his blog today:

"You trace it, and follow the weave."

http://talesandwanders.blogspot.com/

 
At 24 September 2015 at 13:58 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

All excellent comments and summaries. But just to add a little vinegar, or spice, or whatever one wants to call it: great art is sometimes (very often) created by people who are not very nice, not people of integrity and other fine qualities. So "to be an artist in one's life" could simply mean accepting to be ourselves, with all our flaws, and perhaps even turning those flaws into some kind of art.

 
At 24 September 2015 at 15:31 , Anonymous Rebb said...

Outstanding, as usual, Vincent.

No matter how old we are, I still think there are always some "tricks" yet to be learned. I wonder with regard to writing and creative endeavors, if part of our challenge is to trick ourselves out of the self-consciousness that goes along with, that sort-of stepping aside and diving down.

Your post also makes me think of Ray Bradbury's book of essays on creativity: Zen in the Art of Writing. It's been a while since I've read it, but I remember loving it and feeling like he was close by. He would write lists of words to remind him when he later sat down to write. I started doing that on my Notes App. I would write the single words separated by the slash sign to prompt me later if I felt like following my thoughts to fruition. I also have an image of Woody Allen when I watched a documentary of him. There he was sitting on the edge of a bed, talking to us, showing us his box with scraps of paper sprawled with notes, that in some cases, later formed the seed to become his screenplays. It's so wonderful to hear and see when the scraps and jottings become something.

 
At 24 September 2015 at 15:33 , Anonymous Rebb said...

Well, I meant, scrawled with notes...
: )

 
At 25 September 2015 at 05:47 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Distillation is good, Ellie. I like that it’s not a catch-all definition , that it says no to the inauthentic manifestation. And I followed your link. Henry Mitchell is extraordinary, not least for having something worthwhile to say on his blog almost daily.

The vinegar you add, Natalie, and Bryan’s apple-tree metaphor, remind me of Bach, as depicted by John Eliot Gardner in his biography Music in the Castle of Heaven. Apart from the music, Gardner finds scant material to support the godlike reputation. The letters reveal that “Bach the man is all too obviously flawed . . . ordinary . . . something of a bore . . . dull and clumsy letters . . . an endless stream of complaints to municipal authorities on his working conditions and gripes about his pay. There are also fretful self-justifications and sycophantic dedications to royal personages, always apparently with an eye to the main chance. We sense entrenched attitudes but seldom a beating heart.”

It’s great to see you back, Rebb, just like old times. “Tricking ourselves out of self-consciousness”, “stepping aside and diving down”—these do sound like descriptions of what goes on in Zen, though I speak as an outsider. As for Ray Bradbury, I’ve only read him in one short story, “The Whole Town’s Sleeping”. It was in an anthology and stood out from all the rest, staying in the imagination for years afterwards. Since then I hold him in such high regard that I’ve never dared read anything else he wrote for fear of being disappointed.

 
At 25 September 2015 at 06:06 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Am I right to detect a note of determinism in what Bryan & Natalie say above? The apple tree has no choice but to produce apples with its own DNA. No matter what advice Natalie receives or gives to herself, she goes on doing what she does.

Against this, when I suggested it as an ideal to be conscious artists every day, I didn’t think it through at all at the time, and had it in mind that this might influence one’s behaviour, for example as religious ideas might influence a believer’s behaviour.

“So ‘to be an artist in one's life’ could simply mean accepting to be ourselves, with all our flaws, and perhaps even turning those flaws into some kind of art.”

This is a big idea, Natalie, which inspires me to write a follow-up post, “My Life as Art”.

 
At 25 September 2015 at 15:31 , Anonymous Tom said...

An interesting post. My problem lies in the direction of, "Do I have something to say?" I am more comfortable with, "If you have nothing to say, don't say it!" So I don't. I am impressed by the erudition you display, as well as that of those others who comment here. Always a worthwhile read.

 
At 27 September 2015 at 12:27 , Anonymous Nelson said...

I tend to be the same way with your site, Tom. For me, your posts don't usually trigger immediate comment, for they are are vivid fragments of your life-experience (interior musings or life-in-the-world), not invitations to debate, etc. And yet, they often make me brood, perhaps for days on end consciously or otherwise; and my reflections come embedded in the next thing I write, sometimes with reference to yours and sometimes not.

As further demonstration of this, I rediscovered an email from Joe Perfecto received several days before I wrote the post above, in which he says:

“. . . it does warm my heart to know that you find them [Joe’s writings] worthy of reference. But I don't see that as reflecting on me directly as words once expressed take on the status of an entity in their own right, an existence independent of their source. I think that whatever we may write holds more than we realize during production, much as our children become their own persons, distinct from us despite their origination from our very bones.”

It strikes me how his words sank in and helped shape the ideas I’ve expressed above, though unconsciously and unacknowledged till now.

And it makes me want to ask you, Natalie (D'A) whether you see any of your earlier art as offspring who have left home to seek their own fortune, and need no further parental nurture?

As for anything I’ve done, I haven’t reached a verdict. These Wayfarer’s Notes are just that, jotted sketches shared with friends, which might one day emerge dressed-up, rouged and eyebrows plucked for their formal début into Society—or not.

 
At 28 September 2015 at 20:45 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

Those that have literally left home to live wherever they are taken by their new owners are gone and I never think of them. Those that still live with me (like some of the drawings I've been posting recently) don't need nurturing but maybe greater exposure would help to clear my studio. Some are useful reminders that time doesn't necessarily mean progress. But I wouldn't mind auctioing them all off so I could move on, un-influenced by past achievements.

 
At 28 September 2015 at 20:46 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

"auctioning" was the word.

 
At 30 September 2015 at 13:55 , Anonymous Nelson said...

OK, so it wasn't a bad analogy then. I like the sound of an auction. I wonder how one organizes these things.Press releases I guess. Ebay is the biggest auctioneer in the world but not classy enough I suppose.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home