Art: Force-Fed Expression?

Part II: No

In the mornings, when it actually occurs that I have already awakened, I pick up the newspaper and read an article which harkens interest, within which, occassionally, I find a typo, it irritates me. While conversing with my parents, I constantly correct their grammar, specifically, in most cases, when pertaining to the use of the common double-negative. Some would say I'm anal retentive in that manner, which, honestly, I wouldn't really disagree with. What it comes down to is that I take communication and language seriously, whereas most people don't. The average person's only, solitary goal in talking and writing is to convey their meaning or message, no matter how sloppily or haphazardly. I've come to believe, over the years, that the best way to speak and write is in a way which can not be debated, can not be questioned, and is only ambiguous when it serves to enforce a point, not harm it. The writings of William Faulkner enthrall me, especially his stream of conscious works that explore the limitations of language, and, to quote Fugazi, "Language keeps me locked and repeating," an idea I fervently agree with. The spoken and written word are simply conveyors by which we carry outward from our minds ideas and thoughts. There's no real danger or threat in doing that, ever. The same applies to visual arts, or performed arts. When the newspaper fails to care enough to lay down their ideas carefully and precisely, then just that much respect is diminished from it. When a person is too preoccupied getting what they think out as fast as possible to say it as clearly and understandably as possible, then that idea is just that much more confusing and blurred.
It could be said that I take art too seriously. However, I would be apt to disagree, in fact, I would opt to say that what the case would be is the exact opposite. I do not take art that seriously, at all, and everybody does does. Quite frankly, if I don't see where someone is coming from in a piece of art or work of fiction or whatnot, without sufficient enough support to satisfy me, I do not concur nor very much care about what is being said. Someone may blasphemise this very Blogspot, but I care less about that than this aluminum can of lukewarm Caffeine-Free Diet Pepsi I am drinking. It could be sweet, delicious, frothy, chilled A&W Cream Soda, but it's not, so, whatever, I will not deny its existence, but I don't fret too much over it, either, and I move on, drinking it until it is gone and I can find me a frosted mug of Cream Soda. Which, as of now, sounds damn inviting. I accept that not everybody thinks as I do, but I will not accept that people hate and kill over petty disagreements in opinion, like ignorant children or bigoted adults. So that redneck down the street hung a Confederate Flag on a pole in his front yard, so what that those Neo-Nazis down the street are preaching semantic beliefs and telling of the perks of an Aryan world, so the hell what if that artist portrays prepubescent girls in the nude. All of these, indubitably, seem wrong to your ears, and to mine, somewhat, as well, but, if that is all that is being done, then... "Oh, well." I shrug my shoulders and move on. I don't do nothing but further incite anger and violence by burning that redneck's flag down, or throwing rocks at the Nazis, or bomb that artists home. It's hypocritical and idiotic to crusade righteous ideas while acting in a manner identical, at the core, to the one who are crusading against.
It may sound like this is all advocating the idea of, "If you ignore the kid teasing you, he'll stop." No, please, I, of all people, understand perfectly well that that philosophy is absolute bunk. What I say, though, is that when someone "teases you," you respond by, kindly, ripping them to shreds in an intelligent and decent manner, in the same way which they are acting against you. Someone insults you, you insult them if it really does bother you, if they hit you, you hit them in the god damn face if it hurts. However, what people should realise, is that what hurts is not supposed to be meaningless and trivial. A man who shows your deity defiled in his work of art is not telling you that your entire way of life is stupid to him. He is telling you that he holds a different opinion of religion than you do. People need to learn when and when not to take things to heart. Most of the times, there's not very much worth taking to heart. Art is, definitely, not one of those times.
Everything is an expression of ideas and thoughts, opinions and beliefs, life experiences and constructed theories, from words on paper, to words from an actor's mouth, from paint on canvas, pencil on paper, chisel on marble, motion on camera. Those opinions are put out there to show or demonstrate or educate, not to be taken personally, or radically alter your life, or drastically change your mind on something. It can do those things, mind you, but only if want them to, if you are open to the possibility. Art is art, art is humanity's monument to free will and individuality, art is part of what separates us from animals, leave it the hell alone.

Adios.

Currently Playing Song: Neon Genesis Evangelion - Cruel Angel's Thesis (Rei, Asuka, Misato)
Quote of the Moment: "My mother is a fish." - Vardaman, As I Lay Dying, by William Faulkner.