In sum, the speaker has overlooked a crucial distinction between the nature of discovery
and the nature of creation. Although serendipity has always played a key role in many
important discoveries, at least up until now, purposeful intent is necessarily the key to human
creation.
Issue 112
"In order for any work of art---whether film, literature, sculpture, or a song---to have merit, it
must be understandable to most people."
The speaker’s assertion that art must be widely understood to have merit is wrongheaded.
The speaker misunderstands the final objective of art, which has little to do with cognitive
"understanding."
First consider the musical art form. The fact that the listener must "understand" the
composer’s artistic expression without the benefit of words or visual images forces us to ask:
"What is there to understand in the first place?" Of course, the listener can always struggle to
appreciate how the musical piece employs various harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic principles.
123
Yet it would be absurd to assert that the objective of music is to challenge the listener’s
knowledge of music theory. In fact, listening to music is simply an encounter--an experience to
be accepted at face value for its aural impact on our spirit and our emotions.
Next consider the art forms of painting and sculpture. In the context of these art forms, the
speaker seems to suggest that ifwe cannot all understand what the work is supposed to
represent, then we should dismiss the work as worthless. Again, however, the speaker misses
the point of art. Only by provoking and challenging us, and inciting our emotions, imagination,
and wonder do paintings and sculpture hold merit. Put another way, if the test for meritorious
art were its ability to be dearly understood by every observer, then our most valuable art would
simply imitate the mundane physical world around us. A Polaroid picture taken by a monkey
would be considered great art, while the abstract works of Pollock and Picasso would be worth
no more than the salvage value of the materials used to create them.Finally, consider art forms such as poetry, song, and prose, where the use of language is
part-and-parcel of the art. It is easy to assume that where words are involved they must be
strung together in understandable phrases in order for the art to have any merit. Moreover, if
the writer-artist resorts exclusively to obscure words that people simply do not know, then the
art can convey nothing beyond the alliterative or onomatopoeic impact that the words might
have when uttered aloud. However, in poetry and song the writer-artist often uses words as
imagery--to conjure up feelings and evoke visceral reactions in the reader or listener. In these
cases stanzas and verses need not be "understood" to have merit, as much as they need be
experienced for the images and emotions they evoke.
When it comes to prose, admittedly the writer-artist must use words to convey cognitive
ideas--for example, to help the reader follow the plot of a novel. In these cases the art must
truly be "understood" on a Linguistic and cognitive level; otherwise it is mere gibberish
without merit except perhaps as a doorstop. Nevertheless, the final objective even of literature
is to move the reader emotionally and spiritually--not simply to inform. Thus, even though a
reader might understand the twists and turns of a novel’s plot intellectually, what’s the point if
the reader has come away unaffected in emotion or spirit?
In the final analysis, whether art must be understood by most people, or by any person, in
order for it to have merit begs the question. To "understand" art a person need only have eyes
to see or ears to hear, and a soul to feel.
Issue 113
"The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period
of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."
I concede that basic human nature has not changed over recorded history, and that coming
to appreciate this fact by studying history can be beneficial in how we live as a society.
However, I disagree with the statement in two respects. First, in other ways there are marked
differences between people of different time periods, and learning about those differences can
be just as beneficial. Second, studying history carries other equally important benefits as well.
I agree with the statement insofar as through the earnest study of human history we learn
that basic human nature---our desires and motives, as well as our fears and foibles---has
remained constant over recorded time. And through this realization we can benefit as a society124
in dealing more effectively with our enduring social problems. History teaches us, for example,
that it is a mistake to attempt to legislate morality, because humans by nature resist having
their moral choices forced upon them. History also teaches us that our major social ills are
here to stay, because they spring from human nature. For instance, crime and violence have
troubled almost every society; all manner of reform, prevention, and punishment have been
tried with only partial success. Today, the trend appears to be away from reform toward a
"tough-on-crime" approach, to no avail.
However beneficial it might be to appreciate the unchanging nature of humankind, it is
equally beneficial to understand and appreciate significant differences between peoples of
different time periods----in terms of cultural mores, customs, values, and ideals. For example,
the ways in which societies have treated women, ethnic minorities, animals, and the
environment have confin, mlly evolved over the course of human history. Society’s attitudes
toward artistic expression, literature, and scientific and intellectual inquiry are also in a
continual state of evolution. And, perhaps the most significant sort of cultural evolution involves
spiritual beliefs, which have always spun themselves out, albeit uneasily, through clashes
between established traditions and more enlightened viewpoints. A heightened awareness of
all these aspects of cultural evolution help us formulate informed, reflective, and enlightened
values and ideals for ourselves; and our society dearly benefits as a result.
Another problem with the statement is that it undervalues other, equally important benefits of
studying history. Learnmgabout the courage and tenacity of history’s great explorers, leaders,
and other achievers inspires us to similar accomplishments, or at least to face own fears as we
travel through life. Learning about the mistakes of past societies helps us avoid repeating them.
For instance, the world is slowly coming to learn by studying history that political states whose
authority stems from suppression of individual freedoms invariably fall of their own oppressive
weight. And, learning about one’s cultural heritage, or roots, fosters a healthy sense of self and
cultivates an interest in preserving art, literature, and other cultural artifacts--all of which serve
to enrich society.