Does it not seem that even though art may be "imitations of imitations", it is art itself which is the closest to showing the true essence of something?
I believe it really is. If we subscribe to Plato's beliefs, then we believe that if we are able to tap into the innate knowledge in our souls, the knowledge of the realm of forms, then we will know the essence of everything. So that information is already inside of us, therefore, when an artist decides to paint the picture of a field, or a mountain, or anything as they see it, as they envision it inside themselves, then they are tapping into their inner mind, their soul, and producing it on a canvas. That which they produce from their creativity, if they truly feel a deep meaning behind it, may in fact be closer to the true essence of that which they painted than any philosopher could ever devise through reason.
Nowadays, many of us take these aspects of Plato's beliefs (the part of the soul and innate knowledge and the realm of forms) and call it hogwash. In this case, it is even easier to say that art is the best way to reveal the true essence of something, or at least come up with something close to the essence of something (for I believe it is impossible to truly know the essence of something, at least as we stand now). What the artist expresses through their mind's eye on the canvas, or on paper through words, if they really show how deeply they feel for their work and the subject, will really capture something's essence. While reason can benefit humans immensely, it is through artistic expression that we really show our feelings and our view on how the world really is.
No comments:
Post a Comment