Evidence for a widespread anxiety about art abounds. In any one week you can read articles drenched in concern for its future. On the 2nd, Edward Rothstein (via TRE) observed that "art music has become almost quaintly marginal". On July 5th, John Freeman worried that the audience for the novel has been usurped by a TV series. On the 9th, Donari Braxton wrote that he can’t remember seeing anyone "pull out a collection of poetry on the subway and read through just for the sheer pleasure of doing so". It's a staple of print and blogs. On the 4th, there was a variant in Chris Wiegrand's call for "more respect" to be paid to Crime writers.
Of course, not one of these is really concerned about the future of art. They're concerned about the public life of art. Somehow, if "art music" meant something to those to whom it doesn't mean anything, if the viewers of The Sopranos would read "writers with plenty of lively ideas", if poetry critics didn't exclude the "layman" ... i.e the ninety-nine percent of the human-race who hasn't studied the intricate theoretical systems of Italian philosopher Agamben, and if genre fiction was given the same status as literary fiction then ... then ...then what?
Why is it that, from the conservative New York Times, to the liberal Guardian, to the "edgier waters" of 3AM Magazine, a personal engagement with a piece of music, a novel, a poem, is replaced by a search for wider cultural worth?
Perhaps it is the channeling of the true anxiety behind the public face. The art they wish more could experience involves not only the enchantment promised in all art, but also an exclusion. The Eden of modern art is a cold and bitter place. Mitigation of the sense of exclusion from the real thing is sought. Ian Rankin seeks it in the "biting exploration of contemporary social issues" offered by his crime novels. Might sociological studies be seen on future Booker Prize shortlists then?
The two together, enchantment and exclusion, constitute modern art and our experience of it. No matter how much one might embrace escapist art, the experience of exclusion remains - hence the denial inherent in nostalgia for the mythical golden era of Victorian fiction.
What we see every week is anxiety about personal exclusion. It would be better if critics, rather than hiding, mitigating or condemning the exclusion, brought out how the dual experience is liberating. However, this requires a certain amount of patience. Studying the intricate theoretical systems of Italian philosopher Agamben might also help too. Why protect people from it? I certainly recommend The End of the Poem and The Man Without Content. One trick I've found when reading supposedly difficult books is to, well, just read them.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Contact
Please email me at steve dot mitchelmore at gmail dot com.
Website roll (in alphabetical order)
- ABC of Reading
- An und für sich
- Being in Lieu
- Blckgrd
- Blue Labyrinths
- Books of Some Substance
- Charlotte Street
- Craig Murray
- Daniel Fraser
- David's Book World
- Declassified UK
- Donald Clark Plan B
- Ducksoap
- Flowerville
- In lieu of a field guide
- Kit Klarenberg
- Literary Saloon
- Notes from a Room
- Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews
- Of Resonance
- Resolute Reader
- Robert Kelly
- Rough Ghosts
- Socrates on the Beach
- Spurious
- The Goalie's Anxiety
- The Grayzone
- The Last Books (publisher)
- The Philosophical Worldview Artist
- The Reading Experience
- Times Flow Stemmed
- Tiny Camels
- Vertigo
Recommended podcasts
Favoured author sites
Blog Archive
- December 2024 (1)
- November 2024 (1)
- October 2024 (1)
- September 2024 (1)
- July 2024 (1)
- June 2024 (3)
- May 2024 (31)
- April 2024 (8)
- February 2024 (1)
- December 2023 (2)
- October 2023 (2)
- September 2023 (1)
- August 2023 (1)
- July 2023 (2)
- June 2023 (2)
- May 2023 (1)
- April 2023 (1)
- December 2022 (2)
- November 2022 (1)
- October 2022 (1)
- September 2022 (1)
- July 2022 (2)
- April 2022 (1)
- December 2021 (2)
- November 2021 (1)
- October 2021 (1)
- September 2021 (1)
- August 2021 (1)
- July 2021 (1)
- June 2021 (1)
- April 2021 (1)
- February 2021 (1)
- December 2020 (1)
- November 2020 (1)
- October 2020 (2)
- August 2020 (1)
- June 2020 (1)
- March 2020 (1)
- February 2020 (1)
- December 2019 (2)
- November 2019 (2)
- October 2019 (2)
- September 2019 (2)
- June 2019 (1)
- May 2019 (1)
- March 2019 (1)
- February 2019 (2)
- January 2019 (1)
- November 2018 (1)
- September 2018 (1)
- August 2018 (1)
- April 2018 (1)
- March 2018 (1)
- February 2018 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- December 2017 (1)
- October 2017 (1)
- August 2017 (2)
- July 2017 (1)
- June 2017 (2)
- May 2017 (3)
- March 2017 (1)
- February 2017 (3)
- December 2016 (1)
- October 2016 (1)
- August 2016 (2)
- July 2016 (1)
- June 2016 (2)
- May 2016 (1)
- April 2016 (2)
- March 2016 (1)
- February 2016 (2)
- January 2016 (1)
- December 2015 (1)
- November 2015 (1)
- August 2015 (2)
- June 2015 (1)
- May 2015 (1)
- March 2015 (1)
- February 2015 (2)
- January 2015 (1)
- December 2014 (1)
- October 2014 (1)
- September 2014 (2)
- July 2014 (1)
- June 2014 (2)
- April 2014 (1)
- March 2014 (3)
- November 2013 (2)
- October 2013 (1)
- September 2013 (1)
- August 2013 (1)
- July 2013 (2)
- April 2013 (1)
- March 2013 (2)
- February 2013 (1)
- January 2013 (1)
- November 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (1)
- July 2012 (1)
- June 2012 (1)
- May 2012 (3)
- March 2012 (3)
- February 2012 (1)
- January 2012 (1)
- November 2011 (1)
- October 2011 (2)
- September 2011 (2)
- July 2011 (3)
- June 2011 (1)
- May 2011 (3)
- April 2011 (5)
- March 2011 (3)
- February 2011 (1)
- January 2011 (2)
- December 2010 (7)
- November 2010 (1)
- October 2010 (5)
- September 2010 (2)
- August 2010 (3)
- July 2010 (4)
- June 2010 (2)
- May 2010 (3)
- April 2010 (4)
- March 2010 (11)
- February 2010 (3)
- December 2009 (3)
- November 2009 (5)
- October 2009 (5)
- September 2009 (3)
- August 2009 (6)
- July 2009 (6)
- June 2009 (4)
- May 2009 (8)
- April 2009 (8)
- March 2009 (12)
- February 2009 (11)
- January 2009 (7)
- December 2008 (7)
- November 2008 (7)
- October 2008 (17)
- September 2008 (7)
- August 2008 (7)
- July 2008 (7)
- June 2008 (7)
- May 2008 (7)
- April 2008 (5)
- March 2008 (8)
- February 2008 (2)
- January 2008 (9)
- December 2007 (26)
- November 2007 (28)
- October 2007 (14)
- September 2007 (22)
- August 2007 (13)
- July 2007 (17)
- June 2007 (11)
- May 2007 (22)
- April 2007 (11)
- March 2007 (23)
- February 2007 (25)
- January 2007 (21)
- December 2006 (8)
- November 2006 (23)
- October 2006 (21)
- September 2006 (16)
- August 2006 (14)
- July 2006 (32)
- June 2006 (17)
- May 2006 (24)
- April 2006 (16)
- March 2006 (18)
- February 2006 (15)
- January 2006 (8)
- December 2005 (8)
- November 2005 (10)
- October 2005 (7)
- September 2005 (13)
- August 2005 (13)
- July 2005 (8)
- June 2005 (15)
- May 2005 (11)
- April 2005 (12)
- March 2005 (8)
- February 2005 (7)
- January 2005 (15)
- December 2004 (2)
- November 2004 (4)
- October 2004 (6)
- September 2004 (2)
Contact steve dot mitchelmore at gmail.com. Powered by Blogger.
Christ, but that Donari Braxton article is truly vile:
ReplyDelete"Rhythms not devices, tonalities not ‘schematics,’ resonance not lyricism, feeling not category, being not meaning, aesthetics not meter.These are a few ways, it would seem to me, that poetry can be healthily, and intelligibly, presented to a non-academically orientated poetry public. Because, yes, poetry is an art form derived from language, like fiction and like non-fiction. But poetry too expresses, as Valéry once said, a “state of mind,” not necessarily an excursus into intellectuality, nor simply a set of cerebral variations on expression."
Has he any idea what he means by this? Did he pause for one moment before identifying health with intelligibility, or differentiating between 'intellectuality' and a 'state of mind'? Does he know anything about Valéry beyond some gobbet he picked up from The Artist's Way?
I'm feeling a very intense hatred after reading that article.
Thanks for the link.
The New York Times is what you call "conservative"? And the far-Left Guardian rates merely the description "liberal" (a term much abused anyway in present-day political discourse, meaning something different historically and in Continental Europe than it does in American and British political usage)?
ReplyDeleteThanks for adding some humor to my day!
When you stick to literature, you write well, but politically, if your're so far Left as to think the NYT 'conservative', you're merely a caricature of the knee-jerk, bien-pensant Leftism that passes for thought among the Europeans.
Excellent. Thanks for this Steve.
ReplyDelete"Why is it that ... a personal engagement with a piece of music, a novel, a poem, is replaced by a search for wider cultural worth?"
Because, I suspect, "wider cultural worth" is given to pop music, tv, cinema, etc. so the would-be defenders of "culture" want books etc. judged in the same way, in the same cultural newspaper pages, and given the same coverage and worth.
All nonsense, of course.
And, yes, read Agamben!
Yes, excellent post, Steve. People are anxious about this "wider cultural worth" and get extremely upset when some random columnist or blogger doesn't think highly of their own personal favorites...
ReplyDeleteAnd I want to thank "Anonymous" for bringing humor into my day with his highly comical comment.
Kenoma-
ReplyDeleteYou are precisley the reason that articles like Braxtons are pretty essential. he expressed the need for petry to reconnect with a readership outside of those studying literature and poetry snobs. and there you are, representing the knee jerk poetry snob position, calling the article vile and feeling 'intense hatred' because someone expressed quite a common sense viewpoint.
yawn.
i am remaining anonymous because i am a writer, and i dont have any desire to get drawn into a public debate, and then have to waste time considering if everything repreesents a position that i am later going to have to defend. but this article was pretty represntive of the reactionary nature of this blog. everytime i read it (because i get sent a link, not because i read this thing reegularly out of some sense masochism) i am astonished by thge authors ability to express a one line thought in no less than 300 words.
Anonymous, just because an article is sweary and full of fratboy 'tude ('fuck it', 'eat your heart out mother fucker', 'get over yourselves', etc., etc.) doesn't necessarily mean it expresses a commonsense viewpoint, or an interesting one. Braxton's article is a particularly egregious instance of what Stefan Collini, referring to Hitchens, called 'no-bullshit bullshit.'
ReplyDeleteMy point was that beneath the tiresome in-your-face posturing, Braxton substitutes argument for a string of meaningless verbiage.
Take this sentence, far from the worst example I might have chosen:
"Permit a perhaps self-evident comment: Poetry, in a way that is distinctive from most other art forms, is particularly difficult to critically and uniquely appropriate from an artistic standpoint."
What sense, common or otherwise, does this convey? What's a unique appropriation? How does a 'standpoint' appropriate?
I called the article vile because of the barely concealed tone of coercion and violence underlying every flip statement Braxton makes.
Item:
"Conoley’s verse could nevertheless not escape being presented in the poetry world as some tract of cabalistic reincarnationism. Myself, I doubt this is what Ms. Conoley was hoping for when she wrote the poetry, let alone when she decided to publish and give it to the world. However, even if this is exactly what she was hoping for, fuck her."
P.S.: "i am remaining anonymous because i am a writer"... And by day you're, what, a mild-mannered reporter?
I am writing with a name because I am a restores of Norwegian whaling ships and the advertising might come in useful down the road. I'm so far up my arse btw that I think we start from a center-point of neo-conservatism and everything is either right or left of that.
ReplyDelete"i am remaining anonymous because i am a writer, and i dont have any desire to get drawn into a public debate, and then have to waste time considering if everything repreesents a position that i am later going to have to defend."
ReplyDeleteAre you in the habit of taking positions you don't really want to defend? Must be quite a writer.
On arts/cultural matters, the NYT is an *extremely* conservative paper, verging on reactionary. Probably only bien-pensant, know-nothing conservatives are unable to see that.
i agree with last anyonmous’ comment. i mean, just look at kenoma. “hateful,” foaming at the mouth, spitting, now even leaning on some totally vacuous and purposeless semantics bent to dismiss the article (“hey look at this sentence, it doesn’t mean anything! ok, now look at this one!”). Typical.
ReplyDeleteapparently it was intelligible enough for him to spend a lot of time getting riled up and to furiously blog and spit about it, but really there’s only one question he should be asking himself:
“why is my response to this article so emotional?”
since none of his blogs demonstrate he’s capable of answering this question, i'll do it for him.
the reason is, he’s acting like a man who’s been PERSONALLY insulted. totally defensive and over-eagerly belligerent.
and why does kenoma feel personally insulted? easy. he is, as anyonmous just pointed out, the very personification of the reactionary, standpat pretentious crank described in braxton’s article.
kenoma – instead of feeling “hateful” and lashing out like a child does when he gets his feelings hurt, maybe you should take a look at yourself.
I have a wonderful mathematical/linguistical equation that goes along the lines of
ReplyDeletemcb=anonymous
The only wisdom we can hope to acquire
ReplyDeleteIs the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.
TS Elliot
Meg
Anonymous is on the money.
ReplyDeleteIt is a blog that discusses literature, but with no understanding of literature at all. The writer has confirmed before that he can't write fiction or poetry. Just as a musician would not take seriously the critique of the tone deaf, or a chef listen to a restaurant critic with no taste buds, why should anybody other than the writer of this blog, be in the slightest bit interested in what is said here.
The blind man from birth who writes this blog continues to discuss his theories of colour with never a pause to consider the hopelessness of the course he has set out on, presumably voluntarily.
It is a sad fact that the bloggers libido seems wrapped up in this exercise to the point where only death or a further depredation of his miniscule faculties shall put an end to all this futility.
Anonymous, please link to your blog. No need for modesty. If you're right about criticism, then your assertions about qualification to criticise a blog will surely depend on being a blogger.
ReplyDelete