“What is Art?” First Impressions

I’ve just started “What is Art”, and though I’m really only a few chapters in, I’ve already got a lot to say about this book.

In general, I agree with Tolstoy that art is, “ a means of communion among people” (37). I totally agree that if there is (or has to be) a defining quality about art, this is it. I do think there has to be an author with an intention, who tries to communicate something to an audience (I still think this is art even if what is communicated is not the intention, although I’ll get into that later…). At first I thought that using the term “infection” was really poor word choice on Tolstoy’s part, because It makes art seem like a disease, like a corrupting influence. But I actually the term is appropriate for the feeling that Tolstoy is probably describing: what Tolstoy is really getting at here is the physical effect art should have. Art’s effect shouldn’t have anything to do with intellectualization; it should be an almost unconscious transmission of feelings from one person to another, and I see where he’s coming from here.

I also love Tolstoy’s broadening of the definition of art to include the work of the makeup artist, hairdresser, chef, and tailor, and includes such media as a “lullabies, jokes, mimicry, home decoration, clothing, utensils, to church services and solemn processions” (41). At the same time though, I really resist some of the stricter aspects of his definition of art, and his impulse to limit art and audience responses. For instance, I disagree with the whole idea of defining art. I guess I don’t even really like using the word--I don’t think “artists” should have to always consider what they are doing or making in relationship to some kind of type evoked by the word “art.” I also really disagree that “good art” can only be art that makes the audience experience the same feeling as the artist, art that communicates only the author’s intention. First of all, how could you ever verify that you are feeling the exact same thing that you were intended to feel? Secondly, why should (or how can) everyone to react the same way to a work of art? Not only does this seem rather boring, it seems impossibly restrictive. The more different reactions a work of art evokes (ESPECIALLY when it’s within one viewer) the better, for me. I guess Tolstoy, perhaps being an author/artist himself, puts a little too much emphasis on the artist’s intentions. I think intentions are certainly important, but they are not at the core of what makes good art, in my opinion. This probably comes from Tolstoy’s desire to make art more accessible to the people, by making intentions clearer, but I think people should also be allowed to disagree and even think contradictory things about a work of art.

Tolstoy seems to be speaking directly to me and my argument when he says: “Formerly, there was fear that among objects of art some corrupting objects might be found, and so all art was forbidden. Now, there is only fear lest they be deprived of some pleasure afforded by art, and so all art is patronized. And I think that the second error is much greater than the first and that its consequences are much more harmful” (42).

So I can see myself as one of these people wanting to enjoy all art for whatever it brings to the table, and I can totally understand his point. For Tolstoy, the spiritual risks of allowing all art were just too great—I guess I’m just not as concerned about the corruptive power of bad art, although I guess Tolstoy is making me think about it. Perhaps my biggest problem with Tolstoy who is going to do all this censoring? Who is going to decide what art is good and bad? I guess I’d rather just allow it all and restrict my own access to it if I decide it is “bad,” rather than have someone be in charge of limiting art by deciding what is spiritually elevating and what is not.

Well, I doubt that anyone would be shocked by my opinions about art (I realize they’re pretty typical…) and I realize they’re just as much a product the time and culture I live in as much as Tolstoy’s are, but I can’t help—this is just my honest reaction.