I love to dance while I paint, to drum music and jazz, Tibetian bells and bowls, ambient and new age, world music and much more. The paint and brush strokes become a path of my energy of being in the presence, linked with my heart, e-motion, and intuition/inspiration of my sky eye.
The paint dance paintings have no story, no visible, recognizable content, no beliefs in whether its art or even means anything. Some persons have a challenge with no story content, they don't understand it. They want the story, the explanation, the meaning to it. If they look with their sky eye, their heart, they will see the energy of the colors and brush strokes of my spirit dancing across the canvas and see both the product and the joy of the process.
Who decides when something is art or not? Does the artist decide by calling it art? Does the critic looking at the piece decide it's art or not? And what is the criteria? Is art serious or can I dance and play and still call it art?
I don't know the answers, each of us has our own answers and point of view and perhaps we each hold a piece of the truth for ourselves.
Nice Blog space! My opinion is that art can be called art by the artist, and be also be called art by any other entity or person. It is also a reality that the "art" may not be accepted by the reigning social "art catchers", and therefore will not be accepted by any person within that society who buys into the sensitivities of the art catchers. Art can be viewed and judged on a personal level and also on a societal level. I personally think it is cool when an artwork is healing and also judged personally and by society as art. Art "scenes" change as our society changes--so it is all fluid anyway. I take the attitude of Joseph Beuys, art can be viewed as an intention and as a spiritual thing that doesn't even have to have form! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Beuys
ReplyDeleteSuzanne
artfem.net