Art and Science: part I

Earlier this year on a family holiday to France I started to torment myself with the question of whether art or science affected society and, if so, to what extent? 'Did they affect each other', I wondered?

Many a civilised dinner conversation was turned into a debate about the various merits of both and amongst my family there were many opinions. I’d like to share, if I may, one of the conclusions that I’ve come to over the past six or seven months:

Art reflects society

Anyone who’s struggled through On Popular Music by Theodore Adorno will know this principle. He argues that in order to sell music as commodity it must be culturally relevant. Therefore the most successful music – commercially – is that which is most culturally relevant. We sometimes forget that Bach’s music, in its day, was ‘pop’; Bach was the Simon Cowell of the 18th century.

This still holds true: no-one buys music they don’t understand or relate to, unless they’re rather pretentious, and modern art (I’m talking abstract, cubism, post-modernism) only survives because it can be understood and appreciated by a majority of decision makers in the world, and who is a more influential decision maker today than the masses?

Art, therefore, cannot affect society as it is only a reflection of it, no? Wrong, because art is specific to a local society, not a global one. There are ‘uninfluenced’ people across the globe who would be inspired by this art. Even art within the same sphere can affect its kin: African music still inspires western musicians and has affected composition for years.

You’d have to be deaf to ignore the fusion styles that have emerged over the last 50 years. HMV seems to add a new genre of music every time I visit (not that often I must add) and specialist styles litter the internet, the greatest melting pot of creativity today.
As this world gets smaller due to improved communication and transport links the melting pot also gets smaller and art in general will become more homogenous. The crossover in music between the ability to write a symphony and compose a pop song is becoming more broadband: This year at the BBC Proms Goldie premiered his first orchestral composition and Michael Nyman has recently collaborated with soul singer David McAlmont.

I recently reviewed Alan Ayckbourn’s play Absurd Person Singular. In the press release was this quote from the playwrite:

As a nation we show a marked preference for comedy when it comes to play-going, as any theatre manager will tell you. At the same time, over a large area of the stalls one can detect a faint sense of guilt that there is something called enjoyment going on. Should we, people seem to be asked, be sitting here laughing like this? It’s to do with the mistaken belief that because it’s funny, it can’t be serious – which of course isn’t true at all. Heavy, no; serious, yes. In other words, it can be funny, but let’s make it truthful.

It’s this last part that I feel seals the deal for me. Art will not succeed if it’s not recognisably relevant to its audience.

Different societies, however, can and will continue to be affected by the art of other cultures in an ironic bid to become more 'cultured'.

Value

As those who are close to me (not too close, mind) will know I work in a school dealing mainly with sixth form students (that's 16-18 year-olds for you trans-Atlantic readers) who, one would hope, are organised, motivated, courteous and respectful. The quick witted amongst you might see where I'm going with this...

Having had monaural hearing for most of my life I value music, sound, air vibrations etc. very highly and the surrounding skills that are needed to produce a high quality product. This is a particularly busy time of the academic year because there are lots of coursework deadlines looming (next week, eeek!) and most students don't seem to have got their arse in gear yet. As a result stress levels rise and the true value that these students place upon their work becomes clear: in some cases, very little.

Anyone who teaches as part (or all) of their profession will know how frustrating it is when a simple concept doesn't sink in. Again, the value placed on this information/knowledge becomes clear. Those that take it on quickly and accurately, I believe, have placed a higher value on it than those students who don't take it on. Of course, this is a very complicated argument and there are more factors at play other than the 'value' that students place on knowledge that they can't yet see the purpose of, but the question must be raised: Where/how do students learn value? Is it from the parents or is it from their peers? In either case, is that the best place to learn values from?

No-one can deny that parental input, or a suitable substitute, is vital in bringing up a child but the role that peers play in the value argument is key also. As parents, or superiors, what control or guidance can we inspire in these young leaders of tomorrow (as inevitably they may turn out to be!)? The answer, I'm afraid, is very little although there is hope: young teachers/support staff that can bridge the age gap yet retain some authority.

The role played by these young professionals cannot be underestimated and must not be undervalued in itself. As a young professional myself I know the impact that my actions have on these young minds and, annoyingly, I've got to say that I don't feel as valued as I should be. Now, this is not meant to be a rant at my employers, merely an example of how the way children learn values relies not only on parents and trained professionals but also on people who may have not yet worked out their own values, which means that care must be taken when selecting who has access to our youngsters.

So, what can be done to help the situation? Well, as previously mentioned, parenting is vital in the decent upbringing of a child and it is therefore with the parents that the ultimate responsibility lies. However, there are too many other players in the vast experience of a growing child to lay the responsibility solely on them so, as will become more apparent in later posts, we all face a responsibility to each other to be an example of how we would like to be treated and the values that we uphold. Whether it's making sure that your recycling goes out on time or that your cheque book is balanced, we all hold values that define who we are and the only way that other people are going to know about them and, ultimately, respect them is by living by your own example.

Now, the very bright amongst you will have already realised that if everyone shows their true colours (however dark they may be) there'll be a cacophony of value flooding our experiences with other people and not all will be pleasant. Why is this? It's because we have different values to the people in the world around us, yet it is this that makes Earth such a vibrant and colourful world to live in.

In conclusion, then, values define who we are and showing them is the only way that we can expect others to know and respect them, but respect for the values of others is probably the most important value we should all learn to show.