Return to the Treatise on the Function of Art

Among the torrent of replies to the Treatise on the Function of Art I posted back in May was an email from my brother in Bhutan. He took exception not to the main thrust of my argument, which was about art representing the fulfillment of a desire to connect with others by expressing common feelings or ideas, but to something that I'd taken completely for granted; that is, the idea that we make art to satisfy a creative urge. (Perhaps I should have heeded the warning of Theodor Adorno, who in 1970 said, "It is now taken for granted that nothing which concerns art can be taken for granted any more.")

My brother called mine a Western perspective, and rightly pointed out that in earlier years in the West, and still now in Bhutan, religious painting is anonymous and that the ego doesn't come into it. While there is some creativity, he said, the emphasis is on draftsmanship. I guess the purpose of art in this context is to transmit what is believed to be some universal and eternal religious truth, so of course the less the individual tampers with the content the better.

It's a valid point, and one that I should have acknowledged in my treatise, but as a committed materialist living in 21st century New Zealand, I couldn't say I was prepared to give it much further thought in the run up to producing whatever art it is I do as part of the Kisokaido Project. For me personally, art is all about individual expression. But is it really?

The reason I'm bringing this up now is that the other day I read this interview with jazz bassist Gary Peacock, and ever since I've been thinking that just maybe I've got it all wrong. Talking about his trio playing with pianist Keith Jarrett and drummer Jack DeJohnette, Peacock stressed the need to not have an agenda or feel you need to prove something.

It's just the music. What does the music want? Almost all of the music I play with Keith and Jack are like flowers. There's this beautiful bouquet of flowers, so the idea is to really nourish them. You wouldn't trample them, you wouldn't give them too much water or you'd drown them. How do I nourish these flowers so they can really express themselves? You approach the music from that standpoint, rather than as a vehicle for your technique or your self-expression. Creativity is not the point. It's just about the music.

So here we have a musician I respect playing a very modern form of non-religious music in which individual creativity has traditionally been heralded denying that creativity is the point. Now some of the music these three people make together, and especially the solo piano playing of Keith Jarrett (another person who describes his music in spiritual terms), moves me like no other art I've ever come across. And at the risk of being caught out again, isn't emotional impact one of the qualities we all look for in art? So perhaps it's not surprising that when I read statements like the above my commitment to materialism starts to waver ever so slightly.

Distance walked today: 3km
Total distance walked since blog began: 288.3km
Days left until launch of Kisokaido Project: 92