Art Without Parameters

Every piece of communication has a social responsibility. It does not end with just transmitting a message and leaving it there. Communication thrives in a system and in that system, there is a message to be sent and an effect to be considered.

There was a poem defining a situation where some secret had long been held from the poet and he felt so bad. The poem ended with a threat. Then another poem detailed a situation where he was raped, graphically presenting the incident – move for move. Still another poem depicted stammering while one spoke and with it that slap, slap, slap to “slow down the mind so he could speak out the words properly.”

Viewed from the point of view of art, the poem is unique. The poet is very resourceful and imaginative. The output is not common; it is extra-ordinary and would reap the highest praises from some quarters. A snippet from the piece (with all due courtesy for the poet) –

A m-means of s-s-saying w-w-we’re th-th-through… or th-that w-wh-what c-cu-could’ve
(Slap, slap…, slap, slap…, slap…, slap, slap…, slap…, slap…, slap, slap, slap, slap)
B-b-been c-cu-ccould’a b-b-been m-m-meant f-f-fu-fuc-for me, s-s-so-so-oo b-b-be-ee
(Slap…, slap, slap, slap, slap, slap, slap, slap, slap…, slap, slap, slap, slap)
Ps-p-s-p-p-patient and w-waa-weigh-wwait a bi-b-b-bit,--
(Slap, slap, slap, slap, slap…, slap, slap, slap, slap…, slap, slap, slap)
Th-th-th-hat-that s-s-st-stu-s-stuff i-i-i-in h-h-hee-h-hhead denies a kingdom
(Slap, slap, slap, slap, slaps…, slap, slap, slaps…, slap…)

Viewed as a communication piece, however, what does it intend to achieve? Beauty in the artform, but it ends from there. It ends from where the poet has achieved a masterpiece of producing a unique art. However, beyond the poet, what? Where does that leave the source now for which the poem was made? For what is all these beauty in the artform that is a poem? Where does that lead her?

In all the wonderings of the poet, she had produced a work of art from a relative, turning the defect into something useful. It had produced poetry that people can read and enjoy. Enjoy because they can laugh – perhaps in disinterested innocence, not minding the defect, but the funny play of the poem.

The poem now becomes a document - enshrined for eternity under the category, UNIQUE, NEWLY DISCOVERED TECHNIQUES. Poets will follow the example and with alacrity look to people with more defects - relative or not - to surpass the earlier feat.

Alas! Perish the thought that next time, we shall have poetry enshrining all the defects of people and highlighting them.

Today, we talk about rights and empowerment. If one conducts a research and leaves the participant dis-empowered, then that research is not valid as consent is violated. The same is true in producing poetry out of someone’s predicament.

The question is, who owns the data gathered for this poem? Are they the poet’s only? How much of the “message” was supposedly the poet’s and how much, the subject’s? If he knew – and if all people of his kind knew – that out of their predicament a beautiful poem was made - how would these people react? Wouldn’t they feel some of their rights were violated?

Although an artform, poetry comes under the umbrella of communication. The consent of the rightful owner of data must be ascertained first. As it is, poets don’t have more rights than others in communicating. If they did, then anybody can go to war just with poetry. It is then like saying anything you want as anyway, it’s just poetry.

Doesn’t this ring familiar? Didn’t Novelist Dan Brown of Da Vinci Code say, “It’s just fiction”? He simply gets Jesus Christ and marries him off to Mary Magdalene, and he escapes just like that!

As discussed by Robert Traer (1 December 2003, christian-bible.com), Dan Brown uses the character Teabing, who speaks as an expert, and claims, that “almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false." (p. 235). Another one, “The plan of Jesus was to have Mary Magdalene carry on the work of the church. He intended for the future of His Church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene." (p. 248)” Etcetera and etcetera.

As it is, Dan Brown escapes all attacks. ”It’s just fiction!” And anyone who counters this is a fool.

The question that comes to mind then is: Is science supposed to be with parameters, and art, none?

© Copyright 2006 janeabao (UN: kota at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.

Owners of Data

Honesty is a value lost in most of us. Honesty in what should have been revealed, however, takes qualification. If what should be revealed solves something, gives added benefit to most, then by all means reveal it and be relieved from keeping it.

Personal secrets do not need to be revealed if it does not help, however. They may be mistakes that are part of growing up. One writer wrote of being relieved after telling her secrets, which she said, made her a prison all her life. This included revealing her mother’s being an alcoholic and not knowing who her father was. Certainly, one must be selective in choosing whom to reveal secrets.

Messages like these have to be handled carefully. As it is, the data about her mother belongs to her, and without her consent, she may not just tell anybody. The data about not knowing who her dad is belongs to her and it is up to her how she may dispense with it. There are so-called owners of data and this should be respected.

Before feeling obligated to communicate secrets to anybody, what one must consider is what the situation needs, and that is acceptance of those secrets – by oneself. Then and only then will one be able to look at them honestly. This is where honesty first applies, before getting things complicated on the level of having to tell others. As earlier pointed out, communicating secrets may involve some risk if not handled properly.

The reality is that not everybody knows how to handle information passed on to him or her.