sometimes a banana is a philosophy
here's the thing about art: it doesn't matter what we make of it or whether we care for it, because ultimately it is the expression of the artist, who creates according to her or his own need to express.
in a society whose media reflects and skews many aspects of "reality," it is only normal for us to encounter varying degrees of art/performance/entertainment/satire/commentary.
i am not claiming that much of what is on television is art. i have my own ideas about what separates art from entertainment and how they overlap within the context of media. but entertainment still uses symbols (sometimes props) that can carry meaning, and those symbols are interpreted.
the problem with the ways that any creativity is expressed is that the delivery often comes in a package that IS open to interpretation. politics attempts to convey the ideas that opposing perspectives hold as methods of controlling the chaos, whereas art is communicated in a way that is less literal--it uses symbols to address things taken out of the context of the everyday. there are plenty of people who are turned off by both politics and art because they cannot make sense of either, or what either is attempting to "do." (i use art and politics as two examples because they both take up a chunk of my feed on facebook--you could look at any category of media and draw similar conclusions.) and there are people who don't care for either simply because they feel both lack a level of truth or honesty.
as an english major, i had a hard time deciding if i liked knowing what an author intended. on one hand, it seemed this kind of insight allowed me to properly understand a piece of writing, and all of the references or nuances within it. on the other hand, i enjoyed creating my own meaning from a piece, because it was fun to see what my brain came up with, and then it was sure to stick with me. i think we create meaning based on our own experiences; therefore an interpretation that is linked to our own identity is more memorable. and that's the point of growing, no? to evolve as an individual, we become more aware of ourselves, our thoughts, our associations and the habits and patterns that result from them. so if something outside of ourselves has the ability to make us consider what's gone on within ourselves, then it can be valuable.
do i think everything on television has value? no. because there is no way to guarantee that an audience will gain anything beyond the time they're viewing something. and some people would argue that an escape is just as valuable as intellectual engagement.
so the funny thing about the miley cyrus performance at the 2013 VMAs is that it's sparked all this discussion. some of it pure spectacle, some of it analytical--and the analytical responses are both entertaining and intriguing to me! no one knows what cyrus intended the song or the performance to convey. when i first watched the footage, i couldn't put my finger on all of what i didn't like about it, but i knew it made me sad. kind of disgusted with my "culture." after i read a couple different analyses of the show, i only felt more certain that what it communicated was not positive. i was relieved that different people had taken the time to share their interpretations, because i really didn't know where to begin with my own (other than disgust--and not necessarily for the reasons one might assume).
satire uses the absurdities of our culture to make us laugh about them. this is a good coping mechanism, but it isn't necessarily proactive. i've often said that the problem with putting serious issues within the context of comedy, of something light and seemingly brainless, is that people don't look at it for what it reveals about us, or they do and they simply laugh at it and move on with their lives. am i saying that the only programming of value forces us to learn something? perhaps.
what is disturbing are the shows that showcase only the most depressing examples of human beings. shows whose premise involves the exploitation of people solely for entertainment purposes. like when they let someone audition on one of those singing shows who clearly is not talented enough to work within the music industry, and the person who auditioned is humiliated on national television. or when they show footage from the arrest of a drunken and disorderly citizen. or when someone posts a clip of someone getting injured. or when they objectify someone using the same stereotypes we've been trying to overcome for over fifty years.
i don't know. there are so many aspects of our society and our world that are broadcast or streamed into the safety of our living rooms. i have been guilty myself of getting caught up in the entertainment. but more often than not, i'm looking into what a show, performance, clip, or movie says about us. i'm considering how i relate to it. i'm questioning the author's intentions. i know that "sometimes a banana is just a banana," but rarely is something in the media without serious implications about the way we live in this world.
in the case of cyrus's performance, i still wonder what the hell was going on. did those giant teddy bears represent miley's childhood? was their presence indicative of her efforts to be recognized as an adult with the echoes of her younger image mutating before our very eyes? why was she making faces? why was she wearing so little? why was she moving the ways she moved? why were there so many women dancing? why did she grab the ass of that one lady? what in the hell was the connection between the song itself and the costumes and movements on the stage? it might have all just been for shock value. it might. but there are too many things going on within that performance for us not to wonder and draw conclusions. some people have pointed out that cyrus is young, and that we do crazy things when we're young. that's also true, but not all of us choose to share those crazy things with an audience so large. not all of us are celebrities whose audience consists of young people trying to find their own niche and sense of self within a complicated society. again: unless cyrus releases a statement explaining the reasoning behind the concept of that performance, we have no way of knowing what she or her producers and choreographers intended. i enjoy the speculation because it is proof that there are people who aren't just passively watching shapes move across a wall. and that is enough for me to maintain my faith in humanity.
i guess the point i've tried to reach is that it is important to engage in a conversation about the many things that happen around us. social media provides an excellent forum for that type of engagement. the point is that we do take something away from things we witness, whether we realize it or not, and the sooner we start accepting that things influence us subconsciously as well as consciously, the sooner we can move past things equipped with the awareness necessary to continue growing. i have always considered myself an artist because i have that desire, or need, to express myself. and while i enjoy dressing up my ideas and emotions in symbol and metaphor, i also enjoy trying to communicate more literally and directly with others, because sometimes i want to feel the point i'm trying to make is clear for all the people who might hear or read it. this stems from my belief that the people in interact with exist where the ripples i create reach, and therefore i feel a sense of responsibility for what i'm putting out there. and even in the case of this blog entry, which might not be read by another soul, i have made the effort to express myself, to solidify my understanding, without neglecting the possibility that someone might happen upon this and take something away from it.
in a society whose media reflects and skews many aspects of "reality," it is only normal for us to encounter varying degrees of art/performance/entertainment/satire/commentary.
i am not claiming that much of what is on television is art. i have my own ideas about what separates art from entertainment and how they overlap within the context of media. but entertainment still uses symbols (sometimes props) that can carry meaning, and those symbols are interpreted.
the problem with the ways that any creativity is expressed is that the delivery often comes in a package that IS open to interpretation. politics attempts to convey the ideas that opposing perspectives hold as methods of controlling the chaos, whereas art is communicated in a way that is less literal--it uses symbols to address things taken out of the context of the everyday. there are plenty of people who are turned off by both politics and art because they cannot make sense of either, or what either is attempting to "do." (i use art and politics as two examples because they both take up a chunk of my feed on facebook--you could look at any category of media and draw similar conclusions.) and there are people who don't care for either simply because they feel both lack a level of truth or honesty.
as an english major, i had a hard time deciding if i liked knowing what an author intended. on one hand, it seemed this kind of insight allowed me to properly understand a piece of writing, and all of the references or nuances within it. on the other hand, i enjoyed creating my own meaning from a piece, because it was fun to see what my brain came up with, and then it was sure to stick with me. i think we create meaning based on our own experiences; therefore an interpretation that is linked to our own identity is more memorable. and that's the point of growing, no? to evolve as an individual, we become more aware of ourselves, our thoughts, our associations and the habits and patterns that result from them. so if something outside of ourselves has the ability to make us consider what's gone on within ourselves, then it can be valuable.
do i think everything on television has value? no. because there is no way to guarantee that an audience will gain anything beyond the time they're viewing something. and some people would argue that an escape is just as valuable as intellectual engagement.
so the funny thing about the miley cyrus performance at the 2013 VMAs is that it's sparked all this discussion. some of it pure spectacle, some of it analytical--and the analytical responses are both entertaining and intriguing to me! no one knows what cyrus intended the song or the performance to convey. when i first watched the footage, i couldn't put my finger on all of what i didn't like about it, but i knew it made me sad. kind of disgusted with my "culture." after i read a couple different analyses of the show, i only felt more certain that what it communicated was not positive. i was relieved that different people had taken the time to share their interpretations, because i really didn't know where to begin with my own (other than disgust--and not necessarily for the reasons one might assume).
satire uses the absurdities of our culture to make us laugh about them. this is a good coping mechanism, but it isn't necessarily proactive. i've often said that the problem with putting serious issues within the context of comedy, of something light and seemingly brainless, is that people don't look at it for what it reveals about us, or they do and they simply laugh at it and move on with their lives. am i saying that the only programming of value forces us to learn something? perhaps.
what is disturbing are the shows that showcase only the most depressing examples of human beings. shows whose premise involves the exploitation of people solely for entertainment purposes. like when they let someone audition on one of those singing shows who clearly is not talented enough to work within the music industry, and the person who auditioned is humiliated on national television. or when they show footage from the arrest of a drunken and disorderly citizen. or when someone posts a clip of someone getting injured. or when they objectify someone using the same stereotypes we've been trying to overcome for over fifty years.
i don't know. there are so many aspects of our society and our world that are broadcast or streamed into the safety of our living rooms. i have been guilty myself of getting caught up in the entertainment. but more often than not, i'm looking into what a show, performance, clip, or movie says about us. i'm considering how i relate to it. i'm questioning the author's intentions. i know that "sometimes a banana is just a banana," but rarely is something in the media without serious implications about the way we live in this world.
in the case of cyrus's performance, i still wonder what the hell was going on. did those giant teddy bears represent miley's childhood? was their presence indicative of her efforts to be recognized as an adult with the echoes of her younger image mutating before our very eyes? why was she making faces? why was she wearing so little? why was she moving the ways she moved? why were there so many women dancing? why did she grab the ass of that one lady? what in the hell was the connection between the song itself and the costumes and movements on the stage? it might have all just been for shock value. it might. but there are too many things going on within that performance for us not to wonder and draw conclusions. some people have pointed out that cyrus is young, and that we do crazy things when we're young. that's also true, but not all of us choose to share those crazy things with an audience so large. not all of us are celebrities whose audience consists of young people trying to find their own niche and sense of self within a complicated society. again: unless cyrus releases a statement explaining the reasoning behind the concept of that performance, we have no way of knowing what she or her producers and choreographers intended. i enjoy the speculation because it is proof that there are people who aren't just passively watching shapes move across a wall. and that is enough for me to maintain my faith in humanity.
i guess the point i've tried to reach is that it is important to engage in a conversation about the many things that happen around us. social media provides an excellent forum for that type of engagement. the point is that we do take something away from things we witness, whether we realize it or not, and the sooner we start accepting that things influence us subconsciously as well as consciously, the sooner we can move past things equipped with the awareness necessary to continue growing. i have always considered myself an artist because i have that desire, or need, to express myself. and while i enjoy dressing up my ideas and emotions in symbol and metaphor, i also enjoy trying to communicate more literally and directly with others, because sometimes i want to feel the point i'm trying to make is clear for all the people who might hear or read it. this stems from my belief that the people in interact with exist where the ripples i create reach, and therefore i feel a sense of responsibility for what i'm putting out there. and even in the case of this blog entry, which might not be read by another soul, i have made the effort to express myself, to solidify my understanding, without neglecting the possibility that someone might happen upon this and take something away from it.
Comments
Post a Comment