What is art?

[fborth]

Here's what he wrote to Sergei Vasilyevich Rachmaninov about the art of Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin. What do you think?

What is art:

"Art is a ministry of joy. Serving the artist who creates it and creates in order to engage and we concelebrated with him. The joy of the artist created, and that's created in his work a new way of life, and gave us, behold, this undeserved joy ...

People understand there are people? Do you remember now about the people, restless and seduces in spiritual turmoil? Do they know in general that this ministry and joy?

Читать дальше... 

The Joy of ...

It is not available to everyone, and modern humanity is not looking for it. It is born out of suffering and overcoming. Not out of boredom, requiring entertainment, not from an empty soul, not knowing what to fill the void, not from fatigue and exhaustion, which requires all new stimuli and the unprecedented severity. Modern humankind, and its mass, and its "elite", can only run down, get bored and languish on the internal voids. That is why it is eager effect, diversion and excitement, it is looking for noise, cod, bounce and nervous tickling, it requires "stimulants" - not only from the pharmacist, but also from the artist. And how many artists - they, too, the children of his age - goes towards this quest, how many invent "new art" of weary souls, or silyatsya break through to new, unusually severe irritation to give these stimuli crowd. Contemporary art is full of spiritual itching and arbitrary inventions. Who is now contemplating the beautiful, the singing from the depths of a pure inspiration, the great visions? Where there is now a place for joy?

Joy shines and rejoicing, and modern humanity in the art of make fun, giggles and growls. He needs revels and spectacle, but not spiritual joy, football, parades, races and boxing - that's the best "art" for him. Joy comes from the spiritual depths, dostradavsheysya to overcoming and inspiration, and contemporary art throws on the market! new artifices and rational imagination, hired from the wreckage of the material and spiritual chaos of the principle of permissiveness. Joy is a spiritual state, it is from the sky and from the Divine.

Serving ...

All great art was born from the ministry, ministry, free and voluntary, for inspiration. Not out of service and slave "order", now introduced in enslaved Russia. And not from the flattery of helping to modern bored neurotic, filling the shops, restaurants, dance halls, and columns of newspaper and magazine critics. No, but from the ministry.

A true artist can not work forever. He does not have authority over their inspiration, and inspiration must necessarily leave him to go back again. But when he is inspired, he knows what is in service. He called and called - "the divine verb" touched him "sensitive hearing. Called and invited, he feels imminent. And when he had to be, before it is not a lot of random possibilities, and one-single artistic necessity, which he intended to seek and find and which consists in acquiring his services. Doing, he sees, sees the eyes of the spirit, which opened during inspiration. He creates a kind of inner, spiritual certainty, and she owns them, but he does not have authority over her. That is why his work is not arbitrary, and make its arbitrariness in being built - for reasons of "service", "of helping" or a whim - he just does not allow the ministry, it is his artistic conscience.

Do not ask me what to be and what is the artist ... The great Russian poets have said about this, but few believed them: all were thinking - "allegory", "metaphor", "a poetic exaggeration" ... They pronounce - and Zhukovsky, Pushkin, Lermontov, and Baratynskij, and languages, and Tiutchev, and others - and brought out that the artist has a prophetic calling, not because he "predicts the future" or "exposes the depravity of the people" ( although it is possible and it is), but because through him about the river itself the essence of God created the world and man. She he be like a living mystery of God, he it is, it becomes a living body "(Tiutchev): its breath - there is inspiration; ce singing about herself - and heed the artist: musician, poet, painter, and sculptor ...

There is an artist at heart, which conceived and nurtured these mysterious contents.

"There is a whole world in your soul
Mysteriously magical dum ... "
                                     Tyutchev

This depth is usually covered by an opaque mist, not only for others but for himself. And often the artist himself does not know or comprehend what is born, matures and is deployed in this creative, deep gloom. And when he pronounced cured, it is - is most important is the predicate, this prorekayuschiysya extract the meaning of the world, for whose sake and going all the artwork - it is a veiled form, it is hidden behind the musical creation, it is present in his sound, saturates their sighs and moans to them, inspiring them to performance as it inspired the first of the artist-composer, or whether it is hidden behind the poetic word, shining through it and out of vypevaya himself elected and essential words, powerfully chanting rhythm, powerfully finishing line of the rhyme, or if it is hidden behind the picturesque way the picture, the lines that they held for the paint, which they approved, for the images that they (these main predicate) demand and selected ...

Ask the artist - what is it he created? And he will answer you sternly and coldly: "watch" or "listen". For he created his creation in order to tell them to put him, for him to hide, and through him to reveal his main. You have seen and heard of his creation? And then still ask? So, the mystery of incarnation or bickering did not take place: the artist or the failure or inability to listeners, or both at once. But do not expect the same from the artist, so he began to tell you the language of repulsive-ordinary, rational-worn words that which you failed to heed prorekshihsya verbs of his art.

The outer integument of the art - and its tangible 'matter' and what is commonly called a "form" of the matter - all this is only true to a robe of the Chief, predicate, object, ie prorekayuscheysya living mystery. Perhaps even more than "a robe": it is like overlooking "eye" in any way concealed and revealed prorekavshayasya soul works. Artist nurtured and made this soul, this is the main, he suffered for it and found the right "eye": See also in this eye and enjoy yourself, that it concealed and revealed. But do not think that this vestment is nothing more than idle cloth, lying in the folds of random, or that the eye is nothing more than soulless eyes. Of clothes hidden importantly, it is his clothes, his robes or a robe. And hidden behind the eye above all, for the eye is an organ of the soul, he is the eye staring through his mind. And now, the same situation and in art, and everything in it is sensual, exterior is only a sign prorekayuscheysya through him, the main mystery ...

The fact that the artist gives to people, it is not just the sounds or words or pictorial images in the lines and colors. Because of this, should not have and to be art, but it would be enough entertainment, "fun" and circuses. Only that: this work of art could not have arisen. For a work of art all the way (the definition of Pushkin), all necessary (the definition of Hegel, Flaubert and Chekhov), it is not arbitrary, there is no excess, no chance. The art work like the implementation of the law. It all selected major; it everywhere prorekaetsya predicate itself: it is itself embodied mystery, sung to music, or in considerations of in-images, or clothed in words. And, knowing this, could not help wonder sometimes: what is perceived that perceive that interpret the art modern "formal" criticism, broken into pieces of "clothing" of art, as if it was not a robe which became a mystery, and idle fabric arbitrarily abandoned its folds? Or considering the "eye", like the eye doctor - apart from the spirit, which looks through the eye? In art there is no self-sufficient "form", there is no self-sufficient "means of expression", not self-sufficient "voice", "modulation" harmonies "," counterpoint "," expression "," rhythm "," rhymes "," stop "," lines "," color "," masses "," chiaroscuro ", etc. Creating art is first and foremost - above all entertained by the artist, the predicate content acquired from mysterious creatures of the world and man, or (far more sacred and more) - from the mystery of God. And everything else in art is, or professional equipment needed for the service and paving the way for him, or the principal vestment of the mysterious contents. And the artist is not a magician "forms", and not the inventor of fireworks effects, not the player fabrications. He is a minister and pro-ritsatel, and only for that, just because of this - it is a technical master of his art, and always until the end of it - is responsible before God, seek him in vain and vocation Artist ...

The fact that the artist gives to people is first and foremost a kind of deep, mysterious tho 'about the world of man and God - the ways of God and the destiny of man and the world. The artist is a kind of concentrated meditation, people, shelters and deployed - in this melody, in this sonata or symphony, or in this sonnet, this poem, in this drama, or in the landscapes and portraits, or in the bas-relief, in this palace, in this dance. He suggested that people take this meditation, this mysterious tho, put it in her mental-spiritual chuvstvilische and heal them ...

Come - a jet of its air
Wash suffering chest.
And godly life-world
Although for a moment whether it is involved ... "

Artist spiritual suffering and worked. He suffered not only for himself and worked not only for themselves but for others, for all and for all. And so, he endured and saw. He has created: through him, prophesied that "important" than he was cured and managed. He created a new way of life, a new path to spiritual fission and spiritual wisdom. That something objective market and manage tho, clothed in a correct and beautiful robe - this artistic meditation - he now offers as a kind of regal encyclical, for wise and fission, all the suffering and restless.

Fission is fission of the artist who sees his creation, his insight and wisdom becomes their insight and wisdom. They are attached to his vision and his joy, but only on condition that they are attached, and his ministry, ie, that they accept his gift - his creation, his songs, his poem, his drama, his now - with all his soul, his by nature and his own life, not just the eye or ear, or memory, or (even worse) vserazlagayuschey idea, as do professional critics and formalists-lovers, these recorders circuits and components that go past all the main, but it is - by nature of the soul and spirit.

The artist is not only about the river, he is given the power - to inhabit the human soul with new art and meditation to update them, create in them a new being, new life. And that power - his ministry and his joy.

No art, no separate self-contained form, for its shape vroschena in its content, and vroschena precisely because it was originally, in the soul of the artist, she grew out of the principal and the mysterious contents. And the rights he would be a painter, who would say to his critics: "Do not you dare me to formally accept, because you kill this is my creation. Stop chasing ghosts and empty my art, because not that he lived, suffered and executed, so that you passed by my main and give ear to my singing spiritually deaf ear ... "


This art disease of our century: the art of listening for people spiritually deaf ear, and contemplate the art of spiritually blind eye. And because of all the art they see one sense a mirage, and get used to bind with its joy, its fun and its fun. And we do not tenderhearted this disease - standing alone on this noisy highways, and sadly wander through the fair vanity. We hear and see, as in art more and more triumphant theory and practice of irresponsible permissiveness - the aesthetic spirit of Bolshevism. Not in our power to stop him, and we can not even get to hear our voice. But we can become, under the banner of true, responsible and inspiring, invincible and indestructible classic, and at the same time, prophetic art, with a steadfast belief that the historic storm will wash away the emotional pain and evil and cleanse the air and that the spiritual in art as everywhere, highways, and the temptations are many, but the way - one.

And let us not talk about "obsolete" the traditions of art, for the sacred tradition is not passing away ever! ..

Great art will continue forever, as it was always, service and joy. "

Source: http://www.pravoslavie.ru/jurnal/393.htm

Your opinion?

[Art-lover]

Art historians know that in order to derail any discussion on art, one must ask the question "What is art?"
(Hence, fborth - not an art critic)

Nevertheless, the question now and then pop up in separate messages, and was only a matter of time when there will be a hero, ready to take the risk of creating such a theme.
(By the way, once this happens, it may be ripe to create a forum section "Theory of Art. Aesthetics. Art studies", which allows to talk about the beautiful not only in the "Arbor"?)

In any case, is intriguing, as will be developed - if you will - the plot of the topic. Whether it will be reduced to the exchange of quotations, or someone dares to express his interpretation? After "working" definition of art is anyone who is dealing with karitnami, but it is generally preferred to keep his bosom

[Tana]

"Look here, old man, whenever you ask something to explain
you, slowly, silently Light his pipe, releasing a cloud of smoke in the face of the curious, and say these simple words here: "And you have seen ever, as the river flows?"
      - What is it supposed to mean?
      - Absolutely nothing, - said Glez .- That's why your answer will seem all extremely significant. "
(Andre Maurois. Birth celebrities)
this work has already been mentioned on the forum

[Meister]

in fact, this is a discussion about anything)) is still nowhere come))) can not and will not be unanimity on this matter. everyone understands the art of depending on the attitude towards it ... it is the same as asking "what is the universe?

[Glasha]

Сообщение от Meister

... is the same as asking" what is the universe?

... or: "What is Love ?"... ))

-----------

If reduced to the citation - I like
( on sensations ; forgive those whom it once again seem pretentious, nevertheless ..- not afraid of anything))):


Art - this is what we have after God.

[Allena]

Сообщение от Meister

discussion about anything)) is still nowhere come))) can not and will not be consensus on this

And who needs a consensus?
I, for example, are extremely interesting discussions of the forum, so to speak, on the same topic. And very interesting, as brilliantly foresaw Ilyin essence of what is happening today in large in contemporary art. The sad irony is that what with sadness and sorrow Ilyin wrote 100 years ago, today it is a classic. And how will our contemporary art seen in 100 years? And where, interestingly, disappeared Ilinskij joy and the ministry?

[Art-lover]

Should we talk about the essence of art?

I would say poetry Yu Levitansky:

-What does that mean? - It? - Live!
Sew sundresses and light dresses of calico.
-You believe all this will be worn?
-I believe that all this should sew!

Yes, we do not answer this question on the topic.
But attempts to find an answer fruitful in all respects.

Continue?

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Allena

The sad irony is that what with sadness and sorrow Ilyin wrote 100 years ago, today it is a classic.

That's for sure.
Ilyin wrote: "The joy is radiant and jubilant, and modern humanity in the art of make fun, giggles and growls."
It is interesting that he is one of the contemporary art seen?
What if the "roaring, giggling, in his view?
He has a link to the authors?
VV Rozanov, for example, gives specific product ...
The misfortune of such theorists is that they, in my opinion, nothing in art is not understood, or somehow just imagine his task.
Better had nothing about it would not write. And then at other times, they begin to look askance.
And to see such a great critic as Stasov do not read it now, perhaps, except for laughter, and even then, not long ...

[Meister]

Сообщение от Allena

And how will our contemporary art seen in 100 years

I hope that as a negative, as now ... if future generations something even more disgusting not come up with ...

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Meister

if future generations something even more disgusting not come up with ...

Create, invent ... A Hurst will be a classic.