The sun is shining and the hamster is spinning in his wheel.

So everybody, here art we. Where you are I do not know, but one thing that I can tell you is that I am here and most likely if you are reading this then you are inevitably...there.

Hmmm...as I see the words of what I am about to say forming in my head, I think that it might be helpful to you the reader to know that education is a very important thing in my list of ideals. There is a perceptable moment in time when that came about, and that thought will most likely materialize in the form of a blog in the next few days. But the initiation of my thought today stems from chemistry class(which coupled with my recent post on biology gives the sciences an unfair advantage as far as prefered subjects by myself. I am not a real big science guy, but lets run with it.) Now chemistry will almost assuredly be paired with a bit of art theory as is to be expected from a Film Major.

So, if you reference the title of this whole mess you, I must say that I now completely agree with and more importantly understand the whole theory that says particles and atoms and electrons and what-not move at a more rapid(I think Mr. Rea my high school Chem teacher used the word "excited")rate when heated up, this same theory applies to the frequency of philosophical thought. Let me explain. I have noticed in the past few years that first of all, I think alot. Now from there I have noticed that my thought patterns are not neccesarily(ok, for reality sake, are almost never) linear in pattern. This confused me for the longest time up until this past month and a half or so when we have had this most unpredictable weather. Wearing shorts and a t-shirt in 70 degrees and sunny one day and the next morning there being snow on the ground(no exageration.) I have recognized the pattern. I think better when my brain is warm.

The world makes more and more sense everyday!

So now on with the my next thought(actually the main motivation for this post) or epiphany rather under the context of my already warmed up intellectual muscles. So it has been just over 4 months since I saw "Mona Lisa Smile" with a great friend of mine Stephanie Axne. (As most of you may already know this is "The Great Julia Roberts" most recent release, but I personally dont find the lady to be that fantastic, meh perhaps I am just critical.) The thing however that intrigued me more than anything in this film were the scenes inside the art history class that was taught by Robert's character. She started by showing numerous slides of famous paintings and as the flustered teacher soon found out all of the girls in her class at this all girls school "knew" or perhaps better "knew of" all of these paintings. But did they actually know them?

After regaining her composure she puts up a slide of a representational abstract rendering of a sacrificed bull(the name of which and the artist's name escape me, even after some research.) But the painting is very carnal, gory. As most of us would say very abstract, representational only in a similar way to how Pablo Picasso bent the term. She then asked them whether or not it was art. After a brief pause, some confusion and a very lacksidasical answer she asks "What is art?" A few more answers all of which were fairly intriguing but they all seemed to be looking at a smaller portion of the much bigger whole. Eventually Teacher Katherine Watson seems to put their doubts to rest with the answer that she has found to be correct, "Art is anything that you call art."

I must say that I was very impressed with this idea, at first. It had actually been right about this time in my life that I had emailed a good number of my more "artsy" friends and asked them for their individual definitions of art(finding that no one answer was the same or even very similar.) So my viewing of this film could not have come at a more peculiar, perhaps coincidental time.

As I thought about that more and more it lost more and more credibility on me, because I dont feel that everything is art. For example, a few years ago there was a very controversial piece of "art" displayed in the Metropolitan Meuseum of Art in New York, this particular piece depicted The Christ figure surrounded by clumps of fecal matter of various sizes. Now in my mind, how can this be art(and not just because of its controversy. I am very open to new forms of art, but I do feel that there is a line somewhere.)

One conversation in particular gave me a great deal more confidence in this idea that art is not anything that you call art. I opened the idea expressed in the movie to a couple of my friends and one girls answer in particular struck my attention
(I girl whom I respect and appreciate dearly.) She agreed and expounded further, "It may just not be art that you appreciate or it may not even be good art." Hmmm....I thought in my head, without saying another word. "What then is the purpose of art if it is not held to the standard of needing to be good?"

Sure, in defense of her idea I do agree that art means different things to different people and as such I may not be able to appreciate a work that has impacted someone else immensly. Take for example the recent film "Thirteen" a coming of age film about a thirteen year old girl in Southern California that is going through the struggles of growing up too early and that statement doesnt do the thought justice. We're talking about shocking things that teens are going through these days, things such as voracious dieting, alcohol, sex and drugs at a young age(a shocking age like thirteen.) I must say the film was stunning, almost offensive in its content. But for me, I was more or less unable to relate because I have never been a teenage girl, or a brother to a teenage girl or a parent to a teenage girl or even a boyfriend to a teenage girl. So with that point suceeded there is some art that connects with a certain group with a shared characteristic. BUT! and in conclusion I do not think that it is fair to say that anything you call art is art because you say so, just because it may not be good art. And my reason for not thinking that is because I do not see a purpose with "bad" art.

There you go, it is now 1:59pm, it has been an hour and a half since I ate lunch and I can now go work out, safely.

peace,

matt