Monday, April 9, 2007
HOPE not a dirty word
In class there was discussion, and this has come up before, of a disdain for A utopia. I would agree for the most part, as we know paradise found is paradise lost. But in the arts, as with most things that exist as a group, no matter how spread out they are this utopian idea to me boils down to HOPE. Reminds me of that sentiment " Aim for the moon and you will land among the stars", cheesy yes, but should we just have these hopes, dreams if you would. Dosent that simple imaginary gesture drive us give us energy and a since of purpose to pursue. Shouldnt hope father the future, or should we just submit to the failings of those who came before us. Should we just throw up our tired arms and scream dystopia, put our heads down and become stagnent, let the bacteria of apathy and the looming shadows of captitol pressure turn the clear, crisp, moving stream of creativity and community into a cespool of dispair. Art is at it's core an ability to rerender life, take it in and digest what goes on around us, both personally and universally. Having hope in the function of art keeps our slowly sinking noses above water. Dont mean to sound preachy...but we should find energy not apathay in our creative pursuits.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
What does hope give us? It gives us false expectations. It gives us a ficticious sense of purpose, which is inevitably dashed when our false expectations are never met. When the fanciful object of our hope isn't met, we become angry, resentful, jaded. Hope shouldn't father our future; instead, real and practical measures that can incrementally improve things should.
I agree that artists should take in and digest what's around them. But where does hope fit into this equation? When you inject hope into your art, you become quixotic; no longer able to accurately absorb what's around. The creative pursuit in itself should give one energy. We should not have to rely on some muddy-minded fantasies to motivate us.
Post a Comment