I’ve been thinking a lot about the state of art today. Much of contemporary art and literature seems to suffer from similar ills - disorientation, dissatisfaction, disillusionment. Artists hold up a mirror to society, it’s true. So of course it makes sense that art should reflect the world’s turmoil and confusion. But can the artist sit back once she's held up her mirror and say to the viewer, “There. This is what you look like. Isn’t it dreadful?”
I think this is where much of art fails. It skims the surface without seeking the essence, or attempting to search for the cause and purpose of all this upheaval. Our fractured society is reflected in the shattered mind of the artist, who often dredges up his or her own internal battles to inform art that may be cathartic, but is rarely enlightening.
I think this is where much of art fails. It skims the surface without seeking the essence, or attempting to search for the cause and purpose of all this upheaval. Our fractured society is reflected in the shattered mind of the artist, who often dredges up his or her own internal battles to inform art that may be cathartic, but is rarely enlightening.
In the Bhagavad Gita, a seminal text of early Hinduism, Krishna instructs the warrior Arjuna on the ways of true life. He tells Arjuna that the divided mind is the source of suffering, and the cause of anger, attachment, and selfish desires. But the united mind enables us to shed anxiety, and to perform our work “as a man established within himself.”
I’m struck by this phrase, “a man established within himself.” It seems like this is what most of us are searching for - to be comfortable in our skins, poised, confident, and at the same time, un-self-conscious. And paradoxically, the more of our Self we find, the less it concerns us, and the more attention and service we can devote to others.
But how does the mind's unity or division relate to the state of art today? Much great art, it can be argued, stems from struggle - often the artist’s internal wrestling, but also external conflict. Perhaps a fully united mind could never have created Picasso’s Guernica, or Beethoven’s Fifth. Yet there is more than chaos in these works. There is also a drive toward empathy, honesty, and insight.
So perhaps the true artist is a person who is not perfectly at peace, but also does not surrender to confusion and chronic anxiety. Art that lasts is not purely a reaction to its time and place, though of course it is informed by both. And art cannot reside fully in the skin of its maker - though personality and humanity should both shine through.
Yet the beautiful and transcendent faces of art are often forgotten in a quest for cleverness and self-confession. Beauty? the critics scoff. That's so old-fashioned. And anything hinting at soul or spirit is looked at with skepticism if not outright derision.
Yet the beautiful and transcendent faces of art are often forgotten in a quest for cleverness and self-confession. Beauty? the critics scoff. That's so old-fashioned. And anything hinting at soul or spirit is looked at with skepticism if not outright derision.
This saddens me, because I feel that one of the primary tasks of the artist is to see the world with new eyes, without distortion but with love. And love is a dimension I find missing in much contemporary art. Love is a force of attraction, and attraction leads to unity. So perhaps the artist does not need to begin with a unified consciousness, but must have a great capacity to love, and an ability to translate this love into words or images that enlarges this capacity in others.
I'm not speaking of romantic love, of course, or even the Platonic ideal. The kind of love I'm speaking about is what the Gita calls 'devotion.' Devotion is love detached from any expectation of outcome or success. It is love coupled with hard work and service. It is a commitment to small acts of beauty that bring joy or understanding to people's lives.
