You don't need to relate to art in order to simply respect it

Americans flat-out do not get art. We don't care one iota for creativity unless you can sell it; our ability to appreciate art ends at the dollar signs. Artists who live among us are outsiders. We only take them seriously if we think we can exploit them or because of a cultural bias that tells us anyone with that much weird stuff floating around in their head could be brilliant but most likely is criminally insane.

If you are studying any kind of art, what is the first question anyone outside your discipline asks? "Oh, really, so what are you going to do with that, teach?" We don't value creativity enough to think that anyone would even want to make a living at it.

Paul Serilla Serilla Warfare

I am certainly not above these prejudices. I am wary of many of the creative people I know and interact with, and not just when I can't fully comprehend their work. Face it, you know people like this: the painter, the poet, the actor, the composer (complete with the Beethoven mop-top.) If you are enrolled in LSA, you completely understand the logic of having the Art and Music schools on North Campus, and if you are an engineer, you're wondering what you did to get stuck with all these nonlinear people. Let me put it in equation form so you engineers can understand it: mathematical prowess + social ineptitude = jealousy + disgust = put all the different kids a couple of miles north with the math geeks.

Part of the problem seems self-perpetuating. If you grow up in a culture that scoffs at the creative and labels artists as "weird," who then is attracted to being an artist? Sure, many are just people enamored with their craft or the history and study of it, but the rest are those who crave the attention that being different or a "nonconformist" can bring. That, of course, helps keep the community at arm's length and little changes.

I can't say that Americans treat artists any differently than any other culture does. Sure, we have this cosmopolitan view of European sophistication, but for all we know, it could be a big put-on, a little joke on those "New-World pigs across the pond." Just because they have been invading each other for centuries to steal the other guy's precious masterpieces and artifacts doesn't mean they know how to truly appreciate art. Maybe they were just bored. It could all be just an elaborate joke that the whole world is in on except us. It might also explain why the French always point and laugh at us.

Our collective inability to appreciate art sometimes manifests itself in a more direct manner. On Tuesday, the Dallas Museum of Art discovered that three paintings - at an estimated worth of more than $20 million (got your attention, didn't I?) - had been vandalized. Mary Veron, a professor of art at Southern Methodist University, described the paintings to the Associated Press as "major, major pieces of significant American art." With that kind of lucid historical description, you know we aren't talking about "Dogs Playing Poker."

Some idiot(s) decided to express their distaste for the paintings by scratching them with their keys. The only analogy I can think of is if you hated Lee Iacocca and went around keying every K-Car in sight. Likewise, if you hate 19th- and 20th-Century American painters like Frederick Church and Edward Hopper, scratch the hell out of their paintings.

It is this kind of moronic behavior that pisses me off. Sure, it was probably some maladjusted kid on a field trip trying to show off, but I think it spells out something a little deeper about our country. Americans are always justifying their dislike of something with their inability to relate to it. It makes sense - if you understand something, you are more likely to enjoy it or appreciate it, but that logic is not iron-clad. Respect should never be welded to the ability to relate; it's a scapegoat, an easy way to not confront an issue or really think about why you feel a certain way about it.

I am not just trying to justify the pertinacious ramblings of many so-called art enthusiasts who like to spend their weekends posing at galleries as intellectuals. I, for example, am not particularly well-versed in art history or criticism, nor could I say that I even "get" a lot of modern stuff.

I look at a painting by Jackson Pollack and I see a canvas covered in blotches of paint, but I can still respect him because he was obviously able to justify his work and it expressed something to many of his peers and in general, to the broader community. In fact, that's what made him famous. But I'm sure his work would have personal relevance even if critics didn't label him as some sort of visionary. At a certain level, we should be able to respect artists just for putting themselves on the line for their craft.

It just seems that when you don't hinge respect on being able to relate, you leave your mind open to more possibilities and you achieve understanding a lot easier.

- Paul Serilla can be reached over e-mail at pserilla@umich.edu.

03-20-98