There have been a number of thoughtful and interesting posts in response to the blog I wrote in May, The Process of Discovery. Although some time has passed since then (and, as you know, I’ve been so very busy), I thought I would respond to at least some of the posts here so you could all see them. I really do read and appreciate your posts, even though I can’t always respond. I really like it when I see a dialogue develop between you – so many of you have good insights you could share with each other. 

Dear Claire Marie

I have a queue of books I wish to read and perhaps it will lead me to Stephen Hawking. The titles of his work sound tantalizing; ‘A Brief History of Time’: people who lived in the past – say at a time when the magic ritual, as described in AR, was part of life – saw life as circular, rotating through the seasons. We see it as linear. Lewis Carol and Einstein saw it as relative.
It seems that our changing concept of time is both the cause and effect of the way we see things: our human point of view; ‘The Grand Design’: most people associate this concept with God’s Plan. Plato thought of it as a parallel universe (perfect and divine). I do not think the universe is pre-determined but there might be something in modern systems theory – which is something Aristotle also said – that processes create (and break down) forms (think of how crystals are formed) so that one thing automatically leads to another. Logically, millions of universes and realities must exist because our reality exists for us and we have no proof of that either.

AR insists, therefore, that we must try to see the world from a human point of view – just like the hedgehog, we are self-programmed from the way we have evolved, and the hedgehog potentially could evolve so that he behaved in a way not to get squashed by a car.

N.B. AR speaks of the world (as represented by the mandala) as the organization and knowledge of man and the truth and chaos of nature.

 I agree with Whistler that art has no moral purpose – but I think we (the art lovers) are right to judge it as true or false from our human point of view. There is a difference between an artist who is trying to tell the truth and stuff that is nowhere except up the artist’s own arsehole. Self indulgence is not a singular instance of a larger reality. It is not a creative process towards a truth.

Dear Sam

I enjoyed reading your post. I liked your point, ‘If you were a dentist, trained within dentistry, you wouldn’t decide one day to do brain surgery, would you?’ My point is that conceptual art is sterile – a quick trick. You can read more about this in Feargus’ letter in my blog, ‘We see through the eyes of the artist.’
Education today teaches that you can do or be anything you want. This is not the case.

Dear James

AR speaks mainly from the point of view of the Art Lover. I think you’re touching on something important when you wrote, ‘It seems to me that as a generation it would be impossible to create art like the works of Michelangelo, Rembrandt or others similar.’ As AR says, ‘We get the art we deserve.’

But what would you do if you felt you had talent and had the urge to become a painter or other artist? What could you do in today’s very different world?
I think I’ll need to expand on this point in another post.

Share this post

fb-logo-sm
Tweet
  1. Dear Vivienne,

    First of all thank you very much for your reply, I’m glad I’m beginning to touch on something here!

    I think your question raises a very good point. Whilst it would be impossible, I feel, to create art like those created by the greats, I feel that as a planet we seem to have lost passion. I believe that all art is driven by passion, whether it is music, dance, or painting, and whether the passion is love, anger or sadness. We live in such an apathetic society, where we seem to simply trundle on with our day to day lives, no longer making a fuss over what really matters to us, because the attitude is that nobody cares. But did the great artists of the world have that attitude? No! They painted with passion, and they painted because they felt the need to, almost as if called to do so. I believe this is a big part of why we could not create similar works, as a generation of humans we lack passion. And without passion for a cause, will there ever be any causes that actually mean anything to anybody? I doubt so. Which is why I believe Active Resistance is so important. It tells us about caring, about not just looking at the world, or a painting and saying ‘that’s nice’. It teaches us to criticise, to comment on and to actually think. If the whole planet had this attitude the world would be a much better place and, I believe, that Gaia would not be in the grave danger she is in now.

    Many thanks again for your reply,

    James

    Comment by James Emmett on 08/07/2011 at 11:35 am

  2. Dear Vivienne,

    Thank you very much for your response, I too enjoyed reading your post that ‘conceptual art is sterile – a quick trick’, I found this applied to a lot of work that i have seen recently.
    Also touching on James response, Active Resistance must live up to it’s name. ‘Active’ – to do things, to take action and creative positive changes by thinking and acting. I hope that new readers of the manifesto will have a critical eye after reading it and eventually go further to ‘Get a Life’.

    Sam

    Comment by Sam Varnham on 10/07/2011 at 1:17 pm

  3. Sam, you are so right. It really does need to be active. I’ve been readig the manifesto an awful lot lately, and I’ve been thinking so much about society and culture, or more our lack of it and I feel almost like as Art Lovers and followers of Active Resistance we need to launch a campaign or something like that. As a race we are living dangerously. We aren’t acknowledging how perilous our situation is, in terms of climate change and our lack of culture. If we engaged more, if we made more of an effort to learn about the world in which we live, we would probably be more concerned about climate change. I am just so glad that we have somebody who has the ability to make her voice heard on a much wider level.

    Vivienne, you have such a fortunate position of worldwide recognition and I am so glad that you are using it to try and save the human race. If only we could all join together and make a stand, I feel we could actually change the world for the better.

    Comment by James Emmett on 10/07/2011 at 3:27 pm

  4. I completely agree James.
    Although Vivienne’s work is outstanding and her efforts to change the way in which we see the world (which is so clearly crying out for help) – It is down to the people of the world to take action, – and I feel it is more easily said than done, but it needs doing, it takes time, and effort – which some ignorant people seem to see as being ‘optional’ when it isn’t, its in fact a complete necessity to protect the earth.

    I hope that there will be some opportunity for more publicity, more coverage and more care over the manifesto, for the unknowing, and that effectively climate change could actually be what brings us all back together, like a modern day Pangaea – a hypothetical supercontinent – uniting culture, race and creativity so we can all act together rather than just have a separation of the people who think they are helping to the people who actually are.
    Not only to Art lovers need to unite, but lovers of life and the earth itself!

    Comment by Sam Varnham on 10/07/2011 at 7:32 pm

  5. Dear Vivienne, thank you somuch for your response which I only saw this morning. Yes, I agree, millions of realities must exist as our reality exists for us, no proof of that being possible. Artists are possibly those sensing other realities and ours in a very specific way. I’ll try to keep up with your blog as much as possible because I do enjoy it.

    Comment by Claire Marie Régnier on 25/07/2011 at 7:35 pm