The Meaning of Art
These discussions are about the meaning of large ideas by exploring them from their origins in etymology, philosophy, and history and how that has created the modern context of connotations and ideologies we associate with these large ideas. While I will not be able to encompass the entirety of these subjects within one discussion, I still hope to explore the breadth and depth of these discussions as far as possible, and over time. The ultimate point of these discussions is to open the realm of ideas through deeper understanding rather than floating on the surface of unspoken social consensus. What is not the point of these discussions is to be right or decide upon an objective truth. If you find yourself disagreeing with me that’s okay. If I say things that contradict your understanding please feel free to respectfully discuss these things in the comments, the Discord channel, or DMs of any social community in which we are friends.
First we’ll get into the literal definitions of art from Merriam-Webster, followed by some notes from the Online Etymology Dictionary:
1: skill acquired by experience, study, or observation; the art of making friends
2a: a branch of learning: (1): one of the humanities (2)arts plural : LIBERAL ARTS
3: an occupation requiring knowledge or skill; the art of organ building
4a: the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects the art of painting landscapes, also : works so produced a gallery for modern art b(1): FINE ARTS (2): one of the fine arts (3): one of the graphic arts
5a archaic : a skillful plan b: the quality or state of being artful (see ARTFUL sense 2a)
6: decorative or illustrative elements in printed matter
The word "art" comes from the Latin word "ars," which means skill, craft, or art. This Latin term has ancient roots and can be traced back to the Proto-Indo-European root "*ar-", meaning to fit together or join. The sense of skill and craftsmanship evolved over time, leading to the development of the term "ars" in Latin.
The etymology of the word can be summarized as follows:
1. Proto-Indo-European: "*ar-" (to fit together or join)
2. Latin: "ars" (skill, craft, art)
early 13c., "skill as a result of learning or practice," from Old French art (10c.),
from Latin artem (nominative ars) "work of art; practical skill; a business, craft,"
Greek artizein "to prepare"), suffixed form of root *ar- "to fit together."
Etymologically akin to Latin arma "weapons" (see arm (n.2)).
In Middle English usually with a sense of "skill in scholarship and learning" (c. 1300), especially in the seven sciences, or liberal arts. This sense remains in Bachelor of Arts, etc. The meaning "human workmanship" (as opposed to nature) is from late 14c.
(You see here in the 14th century that we have made art uniquely human, removing nature as a work of art. An interesting choice that a Christian culture would decide is that the works of God aren’t art but the works of man are.)
The meaning "system of rules and traditions for performing certain actions" is from late 15c. The sense of "skill in cunning and trickery" is attested by late 16c. (the sense in artful, artless). The meaning "skill in creative arts" is recorded by 1610s; especially of painting, sculpture, etc., from 1660s.
I enjoy this root origin of “to join together,” as my personal feeling on what makes art original or qualitatively good is in the layering or joining together of many elements. This meaning is also at the root of arms, as in weapons, and is related to the word “are”, as in the form of “to be” which I feel art is in the being as much as the doing. You can see here in the origin that art has always been an open and therefore complex idea. It even mentions business as an art, although you’ll find I largely disagree with that, I still find that open interpretation to be an interesting part of the conversation. The point here isn’t to be right, but to explore these thoughts. All skills have a place as art in the way that we do them. All things can be done in an artful way when intention and skill come together.
Aesthetic vs Empirical
There was a time that art, science, philosophy, spirituality and all of the creative endeavors were closer together. Art and science have since “parted ways" and it is a complex and nuanced historical question as to how and why this happened. While there have been times when the emphasis on empirical observation and scientific methods in the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and subsequent periods led to a perceived social separation between art and science, it's essential to recognize that the relationship between them has always been dynamic and multifaceted.
During the Renaissance (14th to 17th centuries), there was a strong emphasis on the convergence of art and science. Artists such as Leonardo da Vinci, who is often considered both an artist and a scientist, embodied the integration of artistic and scientific inquiry. Da Vinci's notebooks are filled with sketches of anatomical studies, engineering designs, and scientific observations. The idea of a versatile multi-disciplinary renaissance person comes to mind.
In the Enlightenment (17th to 18th centuries), there was a growing emphasis on empirical observation and scientific rationalism. This period witnessed advancements in science, such as those made by figures like Isaac Newton. While there was a tendency to prioritize empirical evidence and scientific principles, art continued to be influenced by scientific discoveries and scientific illustration played a crucial role in documenting the natural world.
The 19th century brought about specialized disciplines and institutionalization, leading to a more pronounced distinction between art and science in academic settings. While many artists continued to draw inspiration from scientific advancements, some illustrators collaborated with scientists to visually represent their findings.
In the 20th century and beyond, there has been a resurgence of interest in the intersections between art and science. The fields of bioart, digital art, and various interdisciplinary practices demonstrate ongoing connections between artistic and scientific exploration. This also branches into Ayurvedic medicine, organic supplements, and non-religious, mental health-based spirituality as we see the re-convergence. Although, questions of legitimacy often arise as these lines are blurred.
While certain historical periods may have seen shifts in emphasis, or perception, the relationship between art and science has been characterized by a continual interplay, rather than a complete separation. The perception of a distinct divide is often oversimplified, as artists and scientists have consistently drawn inspiration from each other throughout history. But most artistic contributions to science in the last hundred-or-so years have been in visual representations.
I think this separation has also led to a thinking that visual arts are Art - with a capital A - and all other skills are sub genres of art like music, poetry, theater, dance, literature, etc. My belief is that this is because visual arts, aesthetics, and appearances are a flat dimension and easily judged within a blink of existence while music, architecture, theater, dance and many other art forms take more than just one sense for a short amount of time. The dimensionality of most arts makes it inaccessible as it requires time, and space to appreciate it. You cannot enjoy a song or a movie in less time than it takes to complete. You cannot marvel at architecture until you see it from many angles, you cannot witness the artistic rise and fall of civilizations, movements, gardens, and species without the time and scope to absorb the dimensionality of natural forces upon reality. Visual arts are the only art form that we can absorb and judge in an instant and therefore informs us on which endeavors are worthy of our other dimensions. The cover of an album, film or book must be compelling or you will not endure the contents of the book, film, or music. I also understand that music, dance, and story-telling have changed mediums and context many times over history and have held many different roles in the human experience across time and culture. We’re also a largely symbolic and visual species with broad ideas about symbols, the meaning of colors, and we allow our thoughts to be absorbed in invisible and implied meaning. This dependence upon aesthetics and symbolism will be manipulated into an acceptance of all aesthetics as either truth or art. It is via aesthetics, human vanity, and insecurity that commerce begins to infiltrate our tastes.
For the general consumer, aesthetics and empiricism have parted ways to the detriment of both scientific and artistic fields. Science, politics, and psychology have no spirit while art has become merely a form of entertainment almost completely isolated from real meaning which is exacerbated by an economic system that requires all art to be marketable, sellable, and therefore palatable to either large audiences or small but rich audiences. Pure commerce is the death of empiricism as well as artistic and spiritual endeavors as they are isolated from their own objective or subjective truths in order to compete in the coliseum of market forces which treats all pursuits as resource competitors in a falsified game of survival-of-the-fittest.
In our current setting I would say that there is an institutional push to keep empirical science and artistic endeavors as far from each other as possible, often placing any spiritual or artistic personalities separate from the professional personality. In the “professional world” artistic endeavors are merely hobbies unless you are a well paid and established artist.
If you are respected within the art fields of music, film, dance, etc then you are not valued within the more empirical fields of science, and math, and as economics and politics broach the subject there is even more of a cry for artists to exit the conversation.
Art has been used to tell stories, experiment with mediums, technologies, and techniques, capture moments, convey emotions, share a point of view, inform the public, but it can be described as existing, living, or doing with intention. It is hoping to sway your opinion through hope and action, let you see a subject from a perspective you may not normally see, which may be the artists’ viewpoint alone or it may be a shared but uncommon perspective. In this discussion we have roughly traced the origin and history of art as a concept, in our next discussion we will elaborate upon art as a honed creative skill and its usefulness and utility in our life.
Thanks for reading! If you would like to see the video version check the links below. In the video I offer a bit of impromptu elaboration on certain points and may be working from an older or newer draft than the one published above. Thanks for the support and keep diving deep inside yourself to ask the hard questions that push our humanity to the next level.
Lens Protocol via Tape:
https://tape.xyz/watch/0x019965-0x6d
YouTube:
Sources:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/art
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art
https://arydpo.com/what-is-art-history-philosophy-meaning/#:~:text=The%20term%20%E2%80%9CA%20R%20T%E2%80%9D%20comes%20from,have%20existed%20since%20ancient%20Rome
Art, Its Occult Basis and Healing Value; Merry, Eleanor C. 1961
The Mission of Art; Grey, Alex; Wilber, Ken. Publisher, Shambhala, 1998;
ISBN, 1570623961, 9781570623967
