Dr. Forbush Thinks

Good Art?

How does anyone know what art is “good” and what art is “bad?”

The general public has the idea that a painting is “good” when the painting represents the object that is being painted. But painting is more than just the subject in the painting. We know that by considering photography. Everything in a photograph is reproduced exactly as the lens sees the world. So, with photography there is also the composition of the picture, the lighting and the choice of subject itself. But, what makes a photograph “good?”

I have written on this subject before. Art is about observing the world and creating something to communicate an observation back to the world. The best photographs capture emotions and transfer them back to the world. Similarly the best paintings don’t always capture only the reality of the world, but the reality of the world in light of the emotions of the observer. But emotions are not the only things that influence our observation of the world around us. In fact, the reduction of emotions in art is also studied.

Last night I attended a performance of the Trisha Brown Dance Troop. Trisha Brown has been exploring dance since the 1970s and has presented some extraordinary work in those 30 some years. Since her exploration of dance has been pushing the boundary of what is understood to be “dance” and there are people who find her work difficult. Typical questions asked about her work might be - What is the point? What is she trying to say? Why did she choose the music she chose? What was I supposed to get out of that?

All of those questions need to be asked. While I sat there watching her work I thought about what I was seeing. The first piece was meant to be ethereal. The music was like the wind being blown through a collection of objects. A flute sporadically punctuated the wind. It was a very slow piece with dancers interacting with each other in powerful ways. The piece not only demonstrated the strength of the dancers, but the power in their dependence on each other. I don’t know if the dance was meant to be a metaphor, maybe it was only a vision in Trisha Brown’s mind when she created it. The power in art is that it sometimes communicates in ways that are not direct. The work was certainly intellectual in that one should think about the interactions of the dancers and the repetition of certain movements that were used like a refrain in a song. However, one could just sit there and enjoy the fluid motion of the dancers without thinking about the meaning. But, if one were to view the dance in this way it may be less satisfactory.

So, was this piece “good?” Of course that depends on quite a bit. It depends on what the observer expects to get out of watching a performance. Someone who has been a dancer would know the difficulty of some of the moves and appreciate them. Someone educated in the history of dance would understand how Trisha was pushing the limits and appreciate her effort. Someone who expected that they should put thought into understanding the piece might feel satisfied with their internal discovering of her work. However, someone who attended the performance in order to be entertained may have been less satisfied. So, was this piece “good?”

There were actually three different dances at this performance. The casual performance attendee may find their “easy to appreciate” dance in the last piece. This piece was performed to a “cool jazz” number. The dance was a study in counterpoint which is much easier understood by the casual observer. A group of dancers move in synchronicity, while seemingly random dancers dance against this unison movement.

So, was this piece “good?” The casual observer would find this piece more accessible, while the person looking for something new may not find it as satisfying as the first piece. A dancer who has attempted the difficult moves could appreciate many elements of this dance. However, if someone were searching for some deeper meaning in this piece it may be more difficult to find. So, was this piece “good?”

What I tried to illustrate with my observation of this performance was the difficulty in accessing whether art can actually be graded. There are so many things that determine whether one finds satisfaction with a work of art. The question that really needs to be asked isn't – Was the work “good?” Instead, the question that needs to be asked is – Did the artist communicate effectively to the intended observer? Perhaps the intended observer for Trisha Brown’s first piece was different than the intended observer in her last piece. Maybe she chose the three pieces in order to appeal to three different typical audiences. Maybe the diversity of the material offered is the secret to her success as a long lasting as well as refreshing choreographer.