On Art:

The significance of a piece of art is truly in the eye of the beholder. I for one rarely see a piece of art as representative of me - and on such rare occasions where I feel a connection to the expressed feeling or idea, or to the message being articulated by the artist, I still would not consider that work to be of such profundity that it could encapsulate the world as I know it.

Rather, I prefer to appreciate art for its intrinsic value, and not to extrapolate meanings from so many colors or lines on a page (this goes for sculpture and other mediums) with one exception: writing.

Writing, both fiction and prose, does have the ability to encapsulate an age or a generation - to truly represent an idea in such a full way as to cause real people (rather than the hordes so frequently invoked by art critics) to rally behind it, to live and die for it. Potery I lump in with the other fanciful disciplines, for it is expressive of the writer, not the reader.

So the enxt time you visit a museum or see a painting or photograph, before you open your ears and opinions to the lavish praise or viscious critique of an art critic or teacher (or even a museum tour giude or curator) - ask yourself, what was the last painting that so inspired a people that they rose up and shed the heavy blanket of tyranny? What painting or sculpture or image last motivated an exodus of millions? Started wars? Produced peace?

Feel free to disagree, but in my opinion the pen remains ever superior to the brush.

~JDS