Sculptural Boundaries: Essays On Sculpture
Even though it is impossible to formulate a set of rules that manifest aesthetic sensibilities and remain stable, all art, over all time, is contemporary. One function of The Arts is to mirror complexity, not control it. Technology simplifies the complex, art develops it. A monistic epistemology of aesthetics cannot reveal the interplay of humans to themselves or their environment. Art deals in extreme limits of the potentials available, using the past to re-invent itself, it is therefore not time-progressive, it is an ongoing, pluralistic endeavor.
That pluralism, inherent in mankind, is manifest in his self-perceptions, --the objective realization of necessity as opposed to the subjective awareness of his individuality. With scientific Darwinism mankind became part of the natural world, yet that endlessly progressive ideal has become Marx's definition of fetishism, a fixation on the eg-of-all, it therefore has lead to equality over quality, and is a historical prospective, a tautological proof at the expense of wonder. Striving to overcome necessity we give up amazement. The process of not-knowing, of being able to abandon preconceived imagery is inherent in all art production, that facet is transmitted to its audience wordlessly, in the mentalize that underlies all expression.
Fundamental is the connection between ourselves and our moment, our present-ness and the past. The human figure is a touch-stone revealing continuity; it is us and the moment. Art speaks to that moment and doesn't progress; our valuation of Antigone is just as current as ours of Death of a Salesman, as Praxiteles is to Smith, Bach to Satie. Art aims at an epiphany/freshness while Technology defines/controls in the pursuit of order. Technology is the process of imagery in the pursuit of stability, while the arts are the process of imagination in the pursuit of vitality. Technology is means while Art is ends, --that end being the moment-of-being. In this way the shock of the arts exposes the singularity of each of us, not as mankind but as individuals, for that very reason it can't be unified & orderly. Art is pluralistic because men and their moment is. In our bid for unification, history is distorted to reflect a fiction. That fiction is nationalism, it is not a true reflection. The concept of progress denies recognition of the immediate with substitution by future perfectibility. The theory of unification is the history of war and uses force to achieve a utopian ideal. Pluralism is a theory that unifies mankind in the immediacy of arts without promises that destroy him.
Each work of art is reflected in all other works, not because they deal with the same subject matter, nor because they are inherently beautiful, but due to the mental and emotional that must/ by necessity, be outside language. Each work of art, while perfectly suited to its time, is also timeless, as each life is timeless, as each effort of mankind is timeless. Each work, standing alone is without a past, and as there is no future, the present-ness is all encompassing; it is impossible to grasp the future and not stand outside of the moment. The idea of art, while able to transpose itself, is not approachable unless its wholeness is recognized at the very moment of awareness. This allows all artists to be contemporary, it is not progressive to render artist endeavors in a technological fashion. The scrapheap of history, while certainly containing aesthetic objects, is of a different order than the one that relegates all past attempts to oblivion. We recognize this by the frequency which older styles and forms appear in all fresh works; therefore each artist has all artists, over all time, as contemporaries. The human mentalize is continuous and has not varied, just as the human condition has not, and will not. Aesthetic sensibilities, while they modify human awareness, do not, in themselves, change. Rules in art are not rules, they are the limits of the audience.