Friction & Art: A mere take on the matters of expression & exploitation

Reading the title, you might be misled to believe that this is a treatise on the philosophical aspect of Physics. But I guarantee you it's not. The friction in question is that of the metaphorical heart and mind. I certainly do not believe that heart thinks. But I have no other terms to describe this and I would like to go with the usual conundrums.

Being a human, we are bound to have desires. We are trapped by them. Various walks of belief ascertain that it is carnal of us to have desires. Some do say that desire pushes a species to exploit it's survival and propogation potential. Actually, an unnecessary amount of them. Some say that religious spirituality is the way out of this. But fortunately or unfortunately, I fail to recognise that. We are bound by laws be it legal or religious, to have a discipline. If it wasn't for that, it would be chaotic. But I don't agree that they are foolproof. 

Now, coming to the counterpart (simplified for the sake of understanding) of the desire lies the intellect, the evolutionary boon/curse. No, I don't want to bother myself with the silly argument that which one's better. 

Coming to art, I have learned that art exists for the sake of itself. I don't mean this in a bad way. Art depicts this world we exist in but it lies in its own realm. The identity of art is difficult to be pertained to a person or a place or a certain period. The above can be accredited for the piece of work. 

Mark my words!
Accredited.

Now that we are clear with what I believe to be the truth, let's dive into the matter-at-hand.

Art arrives from the friction between desire and intellect. Any sort of friction. Be it constructive or destructive. Humans do feel the need to express themselves. By reaching out to others or some other form. Some of us make art to express. Some of us exploit. It's a intricate balance. Or imbalance, I should say. I believe I can only believe whether something fits to my definition of art but who am I to say? I am the audience. The piece wasn't even made for me. 

The question is that, is it art if I exploit? I certainly do believe so. I do say that art can be expressive and exploitative simultaneously. Depends on to which degree do you consider something expressive or exploitative. But if you are looking for objectivity, you shouldn't. There is no objective truth that someone is aware of in this matter. By that I don't mean to say objectivity doesn't exist but I do emphasize that you can't arrive at it if it's there. Nor do I discourage you, my dear reader to not try. You are open to have your own opinion. 

By saying that, I wish to stop my turmoil here and let you arrive at your own thought, for thinking is the only way to live.

Do let me know what your takes are on the topic.

Yours cunningly
CharanVVS.

Popular posts from this blog

File #000375 from GENERAL PUBLIC INFO-CATION from The Library of The Public Affairs Agency

Image
The Silikonspiegel (abbrv. SPG; term popularised by Dr. Louis Schattner ), colloquially known as The Fog has become apparent to humanity around the year 465 c.a. The fog has been a subject of wide discussion for around a century now not just because it conceals what lies beyond but because of its unique ability to corrode electronic devices. Under numerous atomic spectrometric trials, SPG showed traces of an unidentified element. This element (further referred to as 'the element') has been hypothesised to be the culprit of the deterioration of electronic devices using integrated circuit chips. Various scientists have theorised that the element has an affinity to silicium (silicon) though some argue that the element is a mere catalyst that renders silicium useless. A widely regarded hypothesis stands that the element has a weaker affinity to carbon yet has no effect on the biological carbon. The origin of the fog has been subject to various speculations. Yet it is still not e...
Read more

what's better than one egg?

Image
( Credits : Divyansh Charan and myself) I am not one to reminisce my love for things. Well, at least, I was not.  Lately, I feel a heightened sense of curiosity into the daily-life affairs, and the trivialities. And I have come to the temporary conclusion that these trivialities add a flavourful nuance to life. Though I wouldn't step down my pedestal of thoughtful labeling to call eggs trivial, it would be comical to not discuss eggs when we are talking about nuance. An egg is one of the most versatile ingredients that could do anything from adding a unique texture to sticking to your throat as you swallow. The latter being a hurdle to many while having an egg, it doesn't cause me much discomfort in enjoying one. "But why are you saying this now?" This cascade of thoughts started when I ordered a boiled egg in my college canteen. I was so pleased and gleeful as I was served an egg with a soft and delicate yellow yolk. See, this canteen I eat at is not a p...
Read more

The Subjective "High"

Good Morning, Lately, I was wondering about the impact of psychedelia on artistic potential of an individual. But before approaching that analysis, one should examine the impact of the subjective "high" that one attains. When one hits the spot- I usually see it as a distortion of reality. That one goes on to stop bothering about the usual, the trivial, i.e. the reality around them.  For people wondering, I'm not on drugs. I feel like puking. This is disjointed. Does this make sense (to the sane, same minds of people not experiencing this)? I don't know.  The boundaries that reality drew around them choose to get erased yet return so elegantly. It's the most painful experience ever. The return of reality. I feel that's why individuals who are high choose to stay high as it is excruciatingly painful to become aware of the reality, again. Yet again, they choose to attain that high via substance or non-substance abuse. But this time, your brain got used to it. It ...
Read more