Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Is DIY culture devaluing art?

See “Amateur Hour,” Chicago Tribune, May 20, 2007, via of ArtsJournal.com

(This isn't specifically about theatre [or Portland] but given our local DIY sensibilities, I think there's relevance enough to ask the question.)

With the Internet making it ever-easier to showcase yourself to a waiting public, culture and art are undeniably undergoing a transformation. Everything seems more democratic these days. That's good, right? Not necessarily. Audiences aren't qualified to pick Broadway leads and many performing arts just can't even be attempted without training.

4 comments:

David Millstone said...

One of the downsides to DIY in the arts is, most certainly, errosion of respect for the craft necessary to SUSTAIN achievements and create a body of work over time (as opposed to getting lucky once or twice.) We see this on local stages and in film all the time, (though it's worth noting that almost NOTHING watchable has been produced by the Portland DIY film world; no one is even getting "lucky," there.)

On the other hand, I do entertain a hope that DIY and open access to venues such as Youtube will, in the end, educate both artists and audiences. So, maybe technology has lowered the bar only temporarily. Maybe lowering the bar has to happen before it can be raised again. Shakespeare was so beloved in his time not because he wrote for an elite--and not in spite of the groundlings' inability to follow his higher poetry--but because Elizabethean popular culture itself was more acutely atuned to poetry in language than our current popular culture, to which Shakespeare is nigh incomprehensible. As more and more people learn the syntax of the arts by doing it--just as the Elizabetheans learned every day poetry by speaking it--the skilled and talented artists will become ever more readily recognizable, and valued.

Or, so I hope.

Anonymous said...

Art, or something that doesn't quite yet qualify as art, but is still individual creative expression, can never to too prevalent, too original, or too accessible. There's still an audience for Shakespeare, isn't there? Still a place for classically trained actors. If your worried your art won't stand the test of time or the inevitable shift toward more "tech savvy" forms of artistic expression, well, you're art should maybe be more relevant, eh? I think it's absurdly egocentric say "we're doing art for the ,right reasons, they just want attention." First of all, the reason for doing art is not the art itself. Good reason don't make good art, and vice versa. Secondly, well, this is just not that organized of an argument and I don't technically have a second point, I just think, yes, democracy is good. Anyone with an idea and the initiative to put something out there should have the opportunity. I wish I had had a forum to make films and receive feedback from the time I was twelve. The audience and time will decide what survives.

Anonymous said...

I don't think it matters. Just as having a smaller, more select crowd of artists doesn't guarantee "higher art", neither does opening up the field hurt the form. I bet if you surveyed any one person's ranking of two sets of art (one group with and one group without DIY contributions), the percentage of "valuable" art contributions would probably be the same across both groups.

Not to mention that the "value" of art is so subjective that the question is a bit irrelevant, don't you think?

followspot said...

A link to another take on the topic, courtesy of Artsjournal.com:

Is Amateur Culture A Threat To Professionals?

Much has been written about the myriad ways in which technology and the Internet are changing our culture. But a new book submits that the most important change being wrought is a decidedly negative one: the devaluing of real talent in favor of a mindless celebration of DIY culture. Are we, through YouTube and other online innovations, "celebrating the amateur to the point of absurdity"? Perhaps, but it's also likely that "the pendulum will swing back, not to the old dominance of professionals, but to a logical middle point. The amateur will be knocked off his pedestal, tossed back into the more general competition for people's time and money."

Chicago Tribune 06/10/07
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/columnists/chi-0610_internetjun10,1,2259619.column?coll=chi-leisurearts-hed