"There's a difference between passion and spectacle Mom. This is spectacle."The speaker was talking about someone's behavior but I'm interested in the line for another reason.
I've often struggled to explain to people why I'm interested in certain types of arts and media and not in others. Goethe's 3 questions have always been a good place to start.
"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe directed that Three Questions be asked about any work of art. They must be answered in order.But beyond that there is the question of passion vs. spectacle. Sometimes artists are able to effectively combine the two (ex: Live Hidden Cameras shows and Cirqu du Soliel), but given the choice of one or the other I'll take passion. What I mean is: I want to be able to feel the passion of the artist for their work. I do not want "art" created simply to make money, with all the feeling and emotion that a janitor puts into their work. With modern production equipment it is completely possible to create work that is clean and neat, pretty to look at, but ultimately empty.
1. What was the artist trying to do?
2. How well did he do it?
3. Was it worth the doing?"
For example, while some of the performers may have passion, Canadian Idol is ultimately spectacle. Jerry Springer (and the rest of it's genre) along with virtually all 'reality television' is spectacle, Nickelback and Shania Twain are spectacle, virtually all American news (CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC etc.,) long ago sold their credibility for spectacle. I personally have no interest in spectacle, no matter how pretty.
I think that is part of the reason that I gravitate toward the CBC and other public broadcasters, independent film, new media and music, etc., It is not simply a product meant to garner sales and profits. It is work that comes from the love of the performers. People who would like to make money with their art, but will not compromise their art for money.
No comments:
Post a Comment