“Now, that is art!” – spoken by an audience member at a recent Revv52 show in Calgary.
Do you have to like it – or should it stir one’s conscience enough to inspire conversation?
Is art “art” for the sake of controversy or is it “art” because it challenges deeply held belief systems?
Think about music of Gaga or Elton John – especially their early years – the costuming, the elaborate set design, the lighting, the music content and the performance.
Think about the art of Salvador Dali, Andy Warhol, Jackson Pollock, Pablo Picasso.
To me, there’s a fine line. The artist has to believe it first.
At times, I’ve seen artists perform a song that is “outside their life experience”. The performance is simply not believable. Watch YOUTUBE performances. Some performances are mesmerizing and some are just forgettable.
This performance by Luther Vandross is exceptional. To me it’s art: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu2JBMNBbKo
In 1941 when the war was escalating, to raise public morale in London, a “Picture of the Month” was exhibited to the general public in the National Gallery each month. To inspire.
When something is performed “at me” – a presentation, a piece of music, a sermon, a public speech, a dance, a actor’s monolgue – I withdraw from the message.
Art begins from the inside out. It inspires.