Michael Bird asserts that great art is amoral and that culture and civilisation are not the same thing. I disagree profoundly: art in itself is the transmission of value, and its interpretation echoes this. Moreover, culture and civilisation are the means whereby humanity can live creatively in society and see beyond itself for inspiration and meaning.
Civis, the citizen and city dweller, is the sign of being able to live under the rule of law and in peaceful relationship with those who are different; culture may well test and question this, but in a safe and sometimes thrilling way. Wagner may be wrong in his personal views but his art is sublimely beautiful and far from devoid of truth.
The Rev Canon Neil Thompson, Rochester, Kent. (Letter to The Times, quoted in The Week May 27 2013. (Letter edited)
Reactions to this letter earnestly requested. I personally feel that art reflects the current mores, and sometimes leads them. Art today is all about what hasn’t been done before (unmade beds etc). It seeks to shock and to create “personalities”. It is also about money, stoked by the arts establishment who talk up artists for profit. All this delightfully reflects current society and its values. What on earth will the future decide is the “great art” of the 21st Century? Michael Bird is right. Culture and civilisation are not the same thing.
You cannot support vulgarity, crudity and pornography and call it civilisation. Too much of what passes for art is simply sensationalist vulgarity. Whatever you may think about the role of the Catholic church in history,at least artists were inspired by its message to a level above body functions. Art was seldom coarse and unimaginitive.
Below is a quotation from one of my history teacher who argued that aspects modern intellectual life destroy human communication (that is, the exchange of concepts through symbols such as words, visuals, or sound) resulting in a near-total absence of meaning.
In my view, his observations about modern art are truer than ever:
“These productions, the fad of the day, were acclaimed by many as works of genius. Those who questioned them and asked their meaning were airily waved aside as unforgivable philistines; they were told that no one any longer sought ‘meaning’ in literature or art but rather sought ‘experiences.’ Thus to look a a meaningless painting became an experience. These fads followed one another, reflecting the same old pretenses, but under different names.”
“I personally feel that art reflects the current mores, and sometimes leads them.”
– – – – –
Maybe add one more category: “art reflects current culture, sometimes leads it, and sometimes destroy it.”