Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site lzwi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!lzwi!psc
From: psc@lzwi.UUCP (Paul S. R. Chisholm)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Art and Entertainment
Message-ID: <273@lzwi.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 15-Sep-85 22:14:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: lzwi.273
Posted: Sun Sep 15 22:14:13 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 17-Sep-85 04:44:50 EDT
References: <3440@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Organization: AT&T-IS Enhanced Network Services
Lines: 86
Summary: skillful game of Literature vs. enjoying Story

In article <3440@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>, marotta%lezah.DEC@decwrl.ARPA writes:
> From: marotta%lezah.DEC@decwrl.ARPA  (MARY MAROTTA)
>...
> Artistic license doesn't mean that the artist can do any anything she
> wants.  The author of a novel must convey some emotions and/or ideas to the
> reader.  Sometimes these are revealed through a plot structure that depends
> on chronological occurrences.  Since this is a controlled, familiar
> environment, this device is effective for the general reader.  But a novel
> can be based on impressions, sensations, and philosophical beliefs.  Take
> William Faulkner, or Samuel Delaney. . . .

(Please.-) (smiley face with wink)

>                                       No clear plot.  No logical
> cause-effect occurrences to provide the reader with the sensation of
> movement, change, and action. . . .

No story.  (See below.)

>                                Instead, these authors require you to read
> differently, to assess the impact of each sentence, each thought, at an
> emotional and associative level.  Similar to a painting by Picasso,
> Dahlgren asks you to accept the artist's style as the most effective way to
> convey impressions and sensations.  If you can associate the elements in a
> Picasso painting with your own view of life, if you can understand why all
> the elements are collected onto one canvas, and if you had some reaction to
> the painting, then you appreciate Picasso as an artist, his painting as a
> work of art.

below:  But it's the forest that's grand, as pretty as the trees are.
Picasso didn't do brush strokes, he did *pictures*, and it's the
pictures that are the art.  Similarly, *fiction* is the telling of
*stories*.  I don't demand a beginning, a middle, and an end (at least,
not necessarily in that order).  But a story is different that an
incident, a characterization, or a description.  You can have prose
that is just one of those three, just as you can have a poem that
doesn't tell a story.  I maintain that such is less entertaining, and in
some important sense, falls short even as Art.

>                                   It is far easier to read a Fantasy novel
> than Sound and Fury, but you will find that the discipline of reading
> William Faulkner is rewarded by a greater appreciation for the power of the
> written word.

I agree with you there.  I read the first of Delany's Neveryon books,
and the primary feeling I got out of it was pride that I finished it.
I'm not sure what that says about about the story.  Maybe that the
writing was worthwhile, but the story wasn't worth the effort.

> When can a novel be judged as A Work of Art?  The requirements are clear:
> the author must use skill, knowledge, and creativity in producing the
> novel.  The first novel by an author does not necessarily reveal the
> author's control over his craft, though it can indicate the level of
> creativity that the author is able to convey in writing.

Bush.  (As in 'bu--sh--'.)  A first novel reveals an author's control
over his or her craft at that point in his or her career.  Books are
static (except in individual's appreciation); writers grow.

You seem to be saying that *writers*, not *writing*, should be
categorized as Artistic or not.  Even given that such pigeonholing is
reasonable (reviews can point out good reads for readers who only read
Art?), no writer is perfect.  Not even in selecting what should go out
in the mail, rather than in the trash.

> To judge each book as a Work of Art is to limit the power of the Science
> Fiction genre, by creating a standard for authors to follow.  Since Science
> Fiction and Fantasy depend on innovation as well as effective technique,
> they can only suffer by attempting to conform to the standards imposed by
> the readership.  Better to judge a book for its own merits, an author for
> her unique skills, and be aware of artistic attempts that fail.  Not all
> Art is good, but all good novels are artistic.

I submit that this is true of all writing, from the worst articles in
Byte to Hemingway and/or Falkner.  The existence of "good reads" doesn't
detract from the quality of Art.  One can bemoan the unwashed public's
choice of entertainment over Art; however, in the absence of official
Art Recognizers (local #345 of the Teamsters, no doubt), tomorrow's Art
will come from today's "Entertainment".  Considering the wealth and
variety of today's Art, that seems to work out.
-- 
       -Paul S. R. Chisholm       The above opinions are my own,
       {pegasus,vax135}!lzwi!psc  not necessarily those of any
       {mtgzz,ihnp4}!lznv!psc     telecommunications company.
       (*sigh* ihnp4!lzwi!psc does *NOT* work!!!  Use above paths.)
"Of *course* it's the murder weapon.  Who would frame someone with a fake?"


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com