ART IS MUCH MORE THAN A RELECTION OF REALITY

Jan 29, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

It is no wonder that art, in all its forms, in Guyana is mired in mediocrity. If there can be such scant understanding of what art is about, then it should surprise no one that this country has failed to develop its cultural industry.
The purpose of art, be it sculpture, paintings, drama or books, yes books, is not merely to reflect society. Art is not just a mirror of what exists in its raw state. If that was the case, everyone would be an artist, because everyone’s reality would become their art. Art is a way of looking at society and treating with that reality.
The problem in Guyana is that for far too long, the art of social reflection has been allowed to simply become a mirror. It has been allowed to merely reflect, without any attempt at treating this reflection, and/or in so doing, condition a response to this treatment.
Art is not just about being a mirror of our culture. When art – in all its forms – is reduced to this base function, then it loses its potency. And in Guyana everything in the arts now seems to be destined for this lesser fate.
A painting simply becomes a visual drawing. It simply reproduces a scene, neglecting effect or projection of some idea or ideal. Anything can be painted and everything has been painted. It is but mere photography on canvas, not art.
Most of the local stage productions have been reduced to this level of mediocrity. Local playwriting is, in the main, now aimed at entertaining rather than engaging or provoking. No wonder the arts in Guyana are in such disarray. Plays have become a mere reflection of our society, and sometimes a mere lampooning of reality. The new label is popular theatre, where the audience goes to and does laugh at even at tragedy. Popular theatre has become so ingrained that even if today a serious production, treating with social themes and with a strong underlying moral was to be produced, the audience would laugh at almost every line. The problem is that the joke is on them.
Art is supposed to say something, not simply replicate a scene of a development. This applies to paintings and plays as it does too to writing. The writer may see something, but not just what he sees and the lens through which he sees is important, but how he treats with it.
Edgar Mittleholtzer wrote a classic called “Corentyne Thunder.” But he was doing more than simply telling a story. He was digging deeper beneath the surface of relationships between a miserly father and his children or between the bizarre relationship between the weather and the fortunes of a family. It was also about the way one social class saw another. This was not storytelling but social commentary using storytelling. This is what art is about. It is not a mere mirror, but an attempt to treat with reality in a certain way. The artist who cannot and does not do this is not engaged in art form.
The good writer goes beyond mere description and reflection. He scours beneath the surface of things, goes deeper than outward appearances to expose what is often discomforting and troubling.
V. S. Naipaul is the master of this craft. He sees beyond the superficial. He exposes the pretence and falseness our existence. He is ruthless and controversial in the way he treats with reality. And this is what makes him so despised, because he shows us a part of us that many of us do not like or wish to acknowledge.
We prefer the superficial – that which is often described as brutally frank and real, except that it is really not. It is what we prefer to settle for because delving beneath the surface will unearth the debris of our existence.
The writer aims to also send a message. We may not always agree with this message. But it is important enough for it to engage us.
Take that short story written many years ago about the cat and the milk: the cat who was an interloper, came like a thief in the night to steal the milk that had been so carefully prepared.
The writer is free to delude himself that there was milk at all, but what matters is not whether anyone agrees with that message, but the fact that it exists.
There may be different realities to what the author addresses. Those different perspectives or ways of representing this reality are today often referred to as narratives. Everyone and every group has/have their own narrative. For some their perspective may be occasioned by the bruises of the loss of political power. But the writer always has the liberty of treating reality the way he or she wishes. After all, is this not what art is about – except if the writing is reduced to a mere base reflection of things; but a mere mirror of society. That is not art. Art goes beyond such reflection.

---

---