Culture could be also considered an alternate, modern form of worshipping, in that the “worshipper” will perceive the artist, singer, politician, etc. as a kind of deity... Like when teenagers have posters with some actor or singer in their bedroom. Those role models are adored by the impressive young mind who sees them as superior beings who transcend common, boring everyday life/reality. Those deities carry with them perceptions and values that the worshipper identifies strongly with. This worshipping goes on all through one's existence, even though sometimes the adult mind has a more complex relationship to its modern deities (the act of idolatry will then be harder to detect and analyze). Thus one could argue that the hidden root of culture is cult, in that culture is saying “This person is good, what he or she expresses is worthy of a special interest.” And by saying “This person has no culture” we in reality would suggest that this person does not worship the same deity as us, have the same belief system or adhere to a similar moral code, etc. It could therefore be argued that all cultures have the same base value, even though different groups will perceive the culture the identify with as being superior to other cultures. Knowing your culture well could mean that you have a higher general culture than someone who is ignorant about his own culture, though.
Let's get back to culture as an art form. Is a thinker/intellectual/philosopher an artist? Could creating a new idea be deemed an act of artistic creativity, in the same way a painter puts together colors in order to create a painting? What is the criteria of creation, is it implicitly material (images, sounds, smells, etc.) or can it be a concept? Can it be a feeling, an impression?
One last question: if someone decides that he or she hates all artists/thinkers and all forms of art/writing/thinking, would that make him or her a culture-free individual, someone devoid of any cult-ure?
No comments:
Post a Comment