30 September 1996
revised 8 Oct 1996
RI-704Ri 'Real Art is not hard to understand'
from Ambassador for Mankind
Message # RI-704Ri for Internet
[Revision note:
The song 'Starry Starry Night'
about the painter Vincent van Gogh
was made famous by Don McLean.]
There is Art (I mean any Art-form,
like painting, music, theatre, books, movies, and so on)
which has been made
with the ONLY purpose to have more of it made.
This is not something that has started at a
particular moment in history, of course.
This purpose for producing Art
JUST to have another painting,
or another movie, or another song,
has always been there.
But sometimes
it has led to great excesses
to follow THAT purpose ONLY
as a motive for painting or composing, etc.,
because THAT is not the original purpose
for making a painting or composition,
or writing a book, or making a movie.
There are painters like Pablo Picasso in 1907, and
"classical" composers like Alban Berg, or Stockhausen,
who used that intention
- to create Art just in order to have more of it,
which is in itself not wrong at all -
in order to justify and
get accepted by the society as "Art"
what in no way whatsoever satisfies
the original purpose of Art.
Maybe they did get no attention (or not enough to their taste)
by making understandable, communicating Art, and
so they made un-understandable Art, and
they said (or implied)
"You are too stupid to understand this 'modern' piece of Art."
(They probably appealed to the "Emperor's Clothes-effect",
from the fairy tale where nobody dared to voice
that the Emperor had NO clothes on.)
That last statement was expressing truly
that others indeed did not perceive or understand their Art-piece,
but
these Artists carefully omitted to say
that they INTENTIONALLY MADE
AN UN-UNDERSTANDABLE PIECE OF "ART",
and
in order to cover that up,
they make YOU feel stupid!
It isn't always that extreme,
though "Modern Art", meaning "Modern Painting",
has brought a tremendous amount of confusion into the subject,
into the very SIMPLE subject of Art.
There is the activity
of composing, or painting, or writing movie-scripts,
solely because someone considers
he has not made enough pieces of Art.
There are Artists, which I mean to include musicians, etc.,
who produce pieces of their work
with the only purpose to have more pieces of their work.
There is nothing wrong with that.
But IF that's the ONLY purpose
with which the piece of Art is made,
then
the Artist goes very very easily off
into the area of, for instance, "Kitsch",
- meaning, repeating things
which do not anymore contain the liveliness or life-force
of the Artist, the painter, the musician,
the author, or the movie director -
or he goes off into the other wrong direction,
the opposite of "Kitsch",
which is, "hard to understand" Art.
"Hard to understand" and Art,
- which I mean to include music,
painting, movies, ballet, etc. -
are almost excluding each other.
The painter Vincent van Gogh
told you many lies, very many lies,
and the only thing which is not a lie from him,
is what his paintings themselves tell you.
Those are about the only things
that were not lies from him:
the paintings themselves.
Vincent van Gogh refused to survive.
Van Gogh refused to sell his paintings.
In order to cover these lies up,
he told the lie
that his paintings were not sold when he was alive
"because people did not understand his paintings".
Maybe that's where the lies started,
that Art, good Art, can be "misunderstood by everyone", which is a lie.
In fact,
ART IS AS GOOD AS IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE.
So it might very well be
that Mister very insane Vincent van Gogh, with his lies,
gave later painters the excuse and justification
to create what is CONFUSED, UN-understandable ART.
It is
- until people will realize
that it IS confused, un-understandable Art -
still called 'Modern Art', like in "Museums for Modern Art".
This stuff will vanish out of musea (museums), and
it will be replaced by UNDERSTANDABLE ART,
at some time in the future.
Art is there to communicate.
So when it does NOT at all communicate,
it is not real Art!
In the field of music
we did not have a Vincent van Gogh,
- though we do have the composer Richard Wagner (1813-1883),
who heavily forced his much DISLIKED music onto people
with the help of the stolen money and psychotic personality
of the Bavarian King Ludwig II (1845-1886) -
and so
we are not forced too much
to listen to Stockhausen or Alban Berg or other music
which was written just for the purpose
of having "'non conformist classical' music", and
which was NOT written to communicate!
Somebody even made an expression for it:
'Art for Art's sake', or in French 'Art pour l'Art'
Not so long ago, (in 1890, that is)
we have had the most insane Vincent van Gogh,
painting VERY beautiful, VERY UNDERSTANDABLE paintings!
But he claims in his letters
that they were not sold during his short and suicidal lifetime
"because people did not understand his paintings",
"because 'the time was not ripe for his paintings'."
It is a tremendous, tremendous lie,
and this may well have been the start and cause
of what is still called "Modern Art",
meaning confused, confusing, and un-understandable Art.
In France, considering himself a professional painter,
Van Gogh painted only five or six years, and
he tried then to murder his friend Paul Gauguin,
when Gauguin demanded of Van Gogh
to also get the paintings they made, SOLD.
(Gauguin wanted to LIVE, you know,
and he wanted to have the money to be able to live.)
Paul Gauguin decided
to at least sell his own paintings, and
Van Gogh, not long thereafter, killed himself,
- meaning, as a direct consequence of his FAILURE
to keep his friend Gauguin suppressed,
Van Gogh killed himself.
By killing himself, Vincent
also destroyed the will to live of his brother
Theo van Gogh.
Vincent had, earlier, made Theo responsible
for 'caring for Vincent's survival',
but Vincent had NOT informed his brother Theo
that he was very determined to NOT survive in any area of life,
not "surviving" more than ONLY painting some canvasses.
As soon as both Vincent van Gogh and his brother Theo
were dead,
these paintings of Vincent
- which were SUPPOSEDLY
"not understood" and SUPPOSEDLY
"not ripe for the time they were made in" -
soon found buyers
and brought the widow of Theo van Gogh to some wealth.
But the evil seed had already been planted
by Vincent van Gogh, in his letters to his brother Theo,
with which Van Gogh justified and covered up
his very, very strong intention
to refuse any decent contact with people,
to refuse any responsibility for others, and
to refuse to understand anybody whom he was in contact with.
Van Gogh was still willing
to communicate to people via a painting,
at some future time,
(that is, when the painting is bought and exhibited),
but for the execution of that future action
Vincent himself ALSO refused to take any responsibility.
If he just had been honest to you
and said:
"I want to be completely irresponsible
for anybody including for myself,
but I still am willing
to give you some beauty
in the form of paintings,
although I am not willing
to take responsibility
that you actually will see these paintings and
that you will be able to enjoy them",
if he would have said this, instead of
covering his irresponsibility up
with fantastic lies,
with the lies
that "people do not understand his paintings" and
that "the time in which he lives does not appreciate his work",
then
LATER PAINTERS might not have taken to themselves the "right" and "liberty"
to start and produce "un-understandable Art"
which "will be understood in the future",
(sure, they will be understood in the future:
as being no real Art!)
then (without Vincent's lies)
THEIR PUBLIC might not have been willing to accept
these painters as
"unrecognized, misunderstood Artists
like Vincent van Gogh also was."
The singer Don McLean made a famous song about Vincent,
spreading that lie further and making that lie very beautiful,
and with it, very acceptable.
I already told you elsewhere (see http://ArtOrg.com/art-e.htm )
that good Art has the life-force of the creator
showing in it.
Generally, this results in ORIGINALITY.
But I would rather say
that the personality of the Artist
makes the work of Art UNIQUE
- which has NOTHING AT ALL whatsoever to do
with it being un-understandable.
Barry Manilow, or Diana Ross, to give two examples of American singers,
have very UNIQUE voices,
yet,
they are very very understandable,
by almost everybody who is able to appreciate
music of our present culture.
Barry Manilow and Diana Ross
sing songs that have also been sung by others,
yet,
their performances are UNIQUE, and
these performances are each of them great pieces of Art,
understood by, valued by, and listened to by billions of people.
And this brings us to another main ingredient of good Art
(which I mean to include music, movies, books, etc.)
and that is:
How much it does contain THE PURPOSE
TO BE UNDERSTOOD by others.
So we have,
to determine how good a piece of Art is,
1. How much does it contain the true personality
and true life-force of the Artist(s), and
how much of that can you (or many others) notice of it
by experiencing the piece of Art.
This already carries over into
2. How big is the intention
contained in the piece of Art (movie, painting, book, etc.)
to be understandable and to be understood.
These are two main points of judgement
for the long-term value of a piece of Art,
also in terms of investment in Art.
There is a third factor which is very important, and
that is of course
what effect the piece of Art creates on others.
That is a study in itself
for which you need to know something
about the fact that people are spiritual beings, and
you have to know quite a lot
about the nature of spirits.
(This RI-Bulletin is expressly endorsed
by the professional painter Jutta Nolst Trenite)
Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind
Copyright 1996 by Koos Nolst Trenite
references:
http://ArtOrg.com (paintings)
- Bulletins about Art and Artists
RI-108i 'LRH on Exchange, Money, Friendship - Van Gogh' of 14 Mar 96
RI-678i 'Vincent Van Gogh and his Misery' of 22 Aug 1996
RI-19i 'Artists and Ethics' of 10 Sept 1992
RI-262i 'Creating despite Suppressive Persons' of 20 Aug 1995
RI-413Ri 'Michael Jackson at FLAG' of 18 Dec 1995
RI-576i 'The great Diana Ross is on our side (of course)' of 23 May 96
RI-587i 'Actress Jane Fonda Looks Through L. Ron Hubbard, now' 31 May 96
RI-18i 'LRH on Wolfgang A. Mozart' of 2 Nov 1994
RI-ACT-15 'Creditability - You are YOU' of 12 Nov 1994
RI-126Ri 'Koos Nolst Trenite - Identity' of 29 Mar 1995
RI-480i 'Koos Nolst Trenite - Life-story' of 14 Feb 1996
- Bulletins with general truth for everyone:
RI-379i 'Religious Tolerance' of 1 Nov 1995
RI-449i 'A Rule For Freedom' of 14 Jan 1996
RI-602i 'Definition of Power' of 20 June 1996
RI-269i 'How to Handle Irresponsible People' of 26 Sept 1995
RI-537i 'The Right to Demand Awareness' of 15 Apr 1996
RI-274i 'Setting Own Awareness-Level - Use of Vital Data' of 8 Oct 95
RI-629i 'Definition of "Care"' of 12 July 1996
RI-631i 'Definition of "Woman"' of 12 July 1996
RI-592i 'How To Look At People' of 5 June 1996
RI-217i 'Choosing Sides - As Ethics' of 24 June 1995
RI-242Ri 'Being There - Freedom to Act' of 22 July 1995
RI-235i 'Handling people with Understanding' of 14 July 1995
RI-617i 'Controlling Evil Intentions, how' of 28 June 1996
- Bulletins about Enemies and Suppressives:
RI-58Ri 'Fair Game Series - Treatment of Enemies' of 1 Jan 95
RI-487i 'Dialogue: On Enemies and Hostility' of 20 Feb 1996
RI-444i 'The Practice of "SP-declares"' of 5 Jan 1996
RI-535i '"An Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" = INSANE' 10 Apr 96
RI-646i 'FACING those who are mean or dishonest' of 31 July 1996
RI-0i 'Current Ethics' of 30 June 1994
RI-10i 'Confronting a Suppressive' of 12 Oct 1994
RI-53i 'Past Life Criminals and Scientology Ethics' 29 July 94
RI-90i 'The Intention of a Suppressive' of 9 Oct 1993
RI-503i 'Walking amongst the dead' of 6 Mar 1996
RI-668i 'COMPLETE Scientology Data for Everyone, FOR FREE' 16 Aug 96
RI-668i-A 'COMPLETE Scientology Data FOR FREE - For AOL-users' 18 Aug 96
RI-563Ri 'CONFIDENTIALITY of All OT-Materials CANCELED' 14 May 96
RI-50RQi 'RI-xxxi series Archive - Content and Use' 28 Dec 94
Revised and Replaced on 6 March 1996
These and other RI-Bulletins can well be obtained here - or
(with WWW-browser) at
ftp://thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI
(with ftp) at
thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI
Back to the RI-Bulletin index.