The value of artistic generosity
Being a dancer myself, I am surrounded by a significant chunk of dancers, choreographers, movers, and dance-related people. My daily life exposes me to these connections, but I always find it exciting to connect with dancers or movers from different practises as much as possible, as well as various geographical and cultural backgrounds. The past few years, after having been to three different dance academies and having lived in five different cities (thanks to the millenial-soul-searching-syndrome), a significant amount of conversations led me to a remarkable observation which has caught my attention: the negative connotations which surround popular or ‘commercial’ dance.
Generally speaking, the majority of dancers who I have been in contact with either belittle or degrade the type of dance which attracts the mass. Most remarkably, in Europe I have heard so many people criticising So You Think You Can Dance, as well as anything vaguely commercial, for misrepresenting the true meaning of dance as an art form. Somehow this observation continues to perplex me, because the longer I am involved in the arts, the more I notice how many artists want to detach themselves as much as they can from the type of art which caters to the mass, as this is usually branded as ‘overrated’ or ‘commercial’ by current artists. As a contemporary dancer, I can speak from experience that I find it the most extreme and evident within the field of dance, particularly in contemporary dance. Why is there a negative connotation that surrounds popular or commercial art? What is it that makes us consider this type of art as bad art?
While history defines the occurences in mankind, I like to think of art as a medium of expression which defines what it is like to be human. History defines what people do in the physical world; art defines how the physical world affects humans internally. This also means that there is no absolute definition of human life, or how it feels like to be human, because we all experience life very differently. For me, the most powerful thing about art is that this medium of expression gives validity to any type of perspective or emotion that a person may have. Art opens a safe field of communication for everyone, where different people have the opportunity to express their personal experiences. Within this space, every experience is valid, precisely because every experience is a human experience and is part of human life.
Essentially, every art is valid, if we look at it from this perspective. Of course, we are all individuals with our own personal tastes, so one type of art may be more appealing to us than another. Nonetheless, what I do find difficult to believe is how a type of art could have negative connotations, or could generally be considered bad, simply because it caters to the public (and when I say public, I mean non-art-related people). Perhaps the type of art which caters to the public, or commercial art, may not always be as groundbreaking or revolutionary as the art which catches the eyes of the art community, but I believe that it is a natural phenomenon that the people who are more acquainted with a certain subject are bound to be more experimental or innovative than those who have less knowledge about the matter. As for all fields, it is natural to experience a deeper sense of understanding the longer you are involved with that certain subject. To take as an example, people who do not cook and are not particularly interested in food will have a different palate than from those who have an interest in exploring different flavours. I, for example, love to experiment with different cuisines. Yet at the same time, I can also still enjoy the taste of a simple pasta and tomato sauce dish, chinese takeout, or mac and cheese out of the box. Although I love the complexity of different flavours, this doesn’t disable me to enjoy the simplest or most common tastes (well, also just because I love food).
In terms of art, and dance in particular, I have great respect for works which cater to the mass, simply because it is generous. It is generous in a sense that it gives the vast majority of people the pleasure of enjoying art, and not just the art community. In fact, I myself used to love watching the background dancers of Britney Spears and I also used to listen to all the MTV chart hits as if no other music existed. Throughout the years and after deciding to be an artist, I have started to develop my own individual taste in dance, music, film, and other art forms, so I have a completely different taste now than when I was younger.
Nevertheless, I find it of utmost importance to never forget that art is not just for artists. We as artists do not have to limit the definition of art to that which pleases us. From my experience, I have noticed that there exists a certain unspoken hierarchy within the arts, where the type of art which is more selective in its audience is considered of higher value. Contrary to this belief, I find that there is also real value that lies within the generosity of an artwork. When I see a work of art, I always ask myself: What does it give me? What does it give other people? Does it make me feel? Does it make me smile, laugh, think, cry, go berserk? What does it let me experience and what do other people experience from it? I always try to consider not only what a work of art gives me, but also what it gives to other people and its significance to our current world. Something might not catch my attention, but it might be very significant to another person. Art doesn’t always have to please the artists. I do, by all means, have respect for inspiring artists who continue to push the boundaries of art. However, art doesn’t always have to be experimental, radical, progressive, subversive, or revolutionary. Art can also simply be fun, enjoyable, easy, entertaining, and pleasurable. Instead of being selective in its audience and only catering to the art community, art can also be generous by letting nonartists experience and enjoy art. After all, art aims to define and relate to human life in its wholeness, and not just an artist’s life.
The generosity of an artwork defines how much it gives. At the end of the day, I have great appreciation for popular or commercial art, because it connects us as an art community to the outside world. Generous art is the type of art which catches the attention of the public, especially people who are not acquainted with the arts. If art became more accessible to the mass, more people would be engaged in the arts, perhaps not only as viewers, but maybe also as artists. The way I see it, the generosity of a particular artwork already defines its artistic value, simply because it gives. It gives pleasure and enjoyment to the public, and perhaps even an initial connection to the world of art. It connects people and transcends social divisions, and eliminates the elitist approach to art. In the end, art aims to connect us as people, and I respect generous art for fulfilling that goal.
