Feelin' Artsy

Recently I have begun to shift my attitude towards a different view of "art". But to understand where I'm going, we have to first look back at where I've been:

(That's not the most overused phrase I love to embrace...)

When growing up, I had many ideas, thoughts, and confusions about "art". I thought of art in a few limited ways. Art included the "high art" greats, i.e. Mozart, da Vinci, and other artists with such detailed and devoted meanings behind there works; and the "low art", i.e. the cutesy artisan shop on the main street of each moderately sized city, or the trinkets and handmade items one finds at antique and thrift shops.

As I entered my late high school and early college years, the additional factor of the "unique" and "weird" was thrown into the mix. This solidified the fact that "art" was something that someone just understood. The paintings, music, and items were something that a small, elite portion of the population got, and that made them special. If you were not in this all-knowing scoffing club, then you were the commoner, or the "other".

So this discouraged me, and even infuriated me at some points. Only in my junior year of college did I begin to pull apart and begin to dissect the complex intertwined dichotomous key that is known as "art", and in a greater sense: "culture".


I would like to stop here and say something. I do not believe in any form of "art" or "culture" that is "lower" or "higher" than any other you can compare it to. In response to "You can't even compare the two!", well, you can always compare some work of art to another work of art.

For example: Take rap lyrics or graffiti on a train, and compare it to a country tune or a painted landscape. Each piece was consciously created to evoke or describe some sort of emotion or feeling the piece elicits. Rap lyrics may evoke the struggles of living in the inner city, or the celebration of a personal life, where a country song may praise the rural lifestyle, while condemning a drunkards lifestyle and praising the wholesome life. And of course, these examples are rarely ever that simple. Usually they are layered with many more messages and highlights.

So as of recently, after wrestling to complete my thesis and working on not being completely absorbed by life changing thoughts and research, I have started rethinking, redefining, and doing more "art".

(Shameless plug for my thesis, which I am currently revising for fun (WHAT AM I!?) 
Click Here to Read My Thesis)

Disclaimer: My thesis was a major influence and instigator of the change of thought that I describe from this point forward. Along with many recent journeys into YouTube and the internet.

My qualification for something that is "art" is that it must be a work, action, or event that was completed with a conscious decision to evoke some sort of emotion or feeling in the observer. That is it. It doesn't matter what it is, or what it does, but as long as it has those qualities (in my book), then it can be considered "art".

One example I love of this is concept is a picture I once saw on one of my many forays into Tumblr. It goes something like this (I can't find the picture, so a text version will have to do):

There is a white canvas in the Tumblr post with a hashtag "art", and the comments are as follows:
"How is this art? Its just a white piece of paper!"
"People think so many crazy things today!"
"You pretty much just proved the point that it is indeed "art".

The conversation proves that what you may think is not art can indeed be art, as long as someone had the guts to go put up a blank canvas and call it "art".


Finally, I have had some fun reevaluations of  why we should keep all art, and consequently cultures, on the same playing field in terms of their "value", i.e. no "high art/culture" and "low art/culture".

Now this may just be my uncanny sense to stare out the window and take things in, but I believe that all artistic expressions and attempts are equal. The Mona Lisa has the same artistic value as the doodles and fanart I see on Tumblr. Both are created to elicit a feeling, or emotion, from the viewer, and as an added bonus, the pieces also communicate the feelings and ideas of the creator via the piece. (Or at least I would think the Mona Lisa would tell us a little bit about da Vinci, but I can't say for sure because I wasn't alive to experience the publicity and reception around the work.) At this point you may be taking me for a fool, but stay with me.

The styles and techniques may be radically different, and the materials and presentation solar systems apart, but they all have that underlying qualifier, or are in the same universe (to stay on the metaphor): It was created to evoke an emotion or feel from the view or observer.

Keeping this idea in mind, either throughout your day or in a deliberate work, can help open up your eyes to a little more about the big picture, along with the details that make it up. Each individual intention of artwork can popup anywhere, and can be a collaboration of many things. The same goes for culture.

Culture has avoided a definition for a while now, and we are nowhere close to nailing down one yet, but maybe a part of the definition of culture may be expanded from "art". Instead of the intentional decisions, maybe culture is the "unintentional decisions, creations, and expressions an individual, a group of people, or a population completes and does which evokes an emotion or feeling in another."

Yes, we can come up with some really horrible unjust examples of this kind of culture, just as we can come up with the same for artwork, but that doesn't mean it is not "culture" or is not "artwork". They were created with the exact same purpose as other wonderful just artworks, or are on the same playing field of unintentionally evoking emotions from the observer via their cultures. And I try not to make this moral choice.

I try to leave my judgement open. It takes an open mind to understand the opposite, and artwork and culture can help us understand the logic and the belief in the "good" of all artwork and cultures. Historical relevancy also plays a part, as well as backgrounds and the way you may have been raised. But each individual has their right to decide what is "right" and what is "wrong" among cultures and artworks. All I ask is that you take some time to think about it before you go throwing harsh judgement around.

So next time you are riding on that bus through the small mountain town, or through the big city, keep an open mind, and see what beauty you can find via logical and outside thinking. You might find that the artwork and culture around you can allow you have a more pleasant and enjoyable view of the world and life, and it can definitely brighten up your day during a dark time.

Electronic Bank Transfer; Supplemental Nutritional Action Program, Consumer Dollars

So what you may not realize, is that the title of this has a somewhat loose theme to it, and if you know your federal/state programs, you may have recognized it.

Yes, its that wonderful time to analyze and ramble a bit about my Washington State Department of Social and Health Services adventures.

So this entire odyssey began at the beginning of February. I received my half year review by DSHS, and, like any good citizen, I tried to fill out the renewal application online. I did exactly what I did when I filled out the initial application: I put my AmeriCorps benefits under the "Other" category. Last time it worked, so why not this time?

Well apparently this registered as "income", so the lovely Olympia office sent me an income re-certification letter for my "income". Well its too bad I don't make any money. After struggling on the phone, I eventually made my way to the physical office, where I proceeded to talk to a real person, who cleared me in 15 minutes. What a great way to take off half a day of work.

So, now I get a letter saying my benefits are going to be reduced in April. No explanation, and no follow up letter (perhaps they sent this one out before I went into the physical office?)

Now here is my gripe. How, exactly, are working people supposed to get into the office to get their assistance? The government should know that there is an entire class of folks out there who are classified as "working poor", and when the DSHS office is only open from 8:00 AM- 3:00 PM, how in the world are we supposed to get our benefits? I am lucky and privileged enough that my supervisors understand my situation, but to the millions of folks out there who are working, but still need to get benefits, they are hard pressed to find time to take off from their job (many jobs give little if any vacation), and even if you could get time off, if you are a temporary worker, or even starting out, that time off could cost you your well earned position.

This isn't restricted to federal/state assistance either. Doctors, dentists, mental health clinics. They are all only open from 9:00 AM- 5:00 PM. That is the time most people work. Weekends are off limits as well for most of these industries. What a shame that millions of people cannot access services and be well because our society is structured to shut down at 5:00 PM. The only places that are open after work hours are unhealthy eateries, entertainment venues, and bars. We need to work out of the sunlight routine and into the reality of modernity. Sure, it may not be "better" to some people, and we could stand to go outside sometimes anyway, but a staggered work, service, and play schedule seem more logical than lumping two into one, corroding work productivity, and creating an inequality in wellness which stretches among class lines and career privileges. Why hasn't this been brought up in popular discussion? It seems like we could alleviate so many issues by simply restructuring the way we work.