The Impractical Imagination
in a World Starved for Meaning and Relevance
by J.A. Borgesse
What if any, is the purpose of depicting imaginary worlds in art? A few years ago, I would have responded to that question with any number of high-minded and long-winded statements, but lately, I've been thinking that it is merely to entertain or titillate. The past four years of viewing as much contemporary art of imagination as possible, has left me with the feeling of having visited an amusement park or a burlesque show. The curious thing about entertainment and titillation is not so much their universal popularity, but their addictive quality. After their effects wear off, one is left with a deflated feeling that gives rise to cravings for more and larger doses of entertainment and titillation. Each year, the images in art of imagination get more bizarre, absurd, and sensational often featuring increased levels of technical prowess, realism, and superfluous detail as if to satiate their audience's increasing demands for them. What seems in sharp decline however, is relevance and meaning. It is analogous to the billowing trend in Hollywood movies to rely on dazzling special effects rather than plot and dialogue in order to sell tickets and DVDs. Yet the same imagination that produces these otherworldly flights of fancy is capable of depicting relevant content in a highly imaginative way.
Artistic imagination is at its best I think, when it inspires, transforms, or has edifying characteristics. I find, for instance, that the pseudo variants of surrealist art are more consequential than surrealist art proper. These pseudo variants including Social Surrealism, Massurealism, and in rare instances, even Pop Surrealism employ challenging, thought provoking material via the imagination while most surrealist art, particularly of the automatist variety, remains content with the "marvelous" signifying that the imagination has nothing further to offer. To me the truly marvelous is not confined to the inner world (including the so called unconscious) but includes the symbolic representation of what we like to call mundane reality or the outer world (which is perceived via all modes of consciousness). It is best achieved by including a manipulation or recreation of conditions and circumstances of mundane existence, rather than the depiction of realms that do not exist at least to our ordinary modes of perception. The best use of artistic imagination requires a valid foundation for it to rest upon, otherwise there is no point of reference and one is in the predicament of merely reacting to the unusual as opposed to interacting with it in a beneficial i.e. practical manner.
An increasing measure of fantastic art and its close derivatives has a similar problem: they have always depicted imaginary worlds but these more often than not, symbolized timeless truths. The more recent offerings contain spectacular but empty visual gestures, little more than a redundant dose of escapism in a society overdosing on such material. The worst examples are little more than eye candy, void of true imagination in that they contain genre clichés or irrelevant variations on worn out themes.
Visionary art has in some quarters, expanded its definition these past years; the result perhaps of market driven dogma issued through questionable sources and the lack of definitions by academicians on the subject. In doing so, it has included art that compromises its traditionally high standards, which had a more contained definition. The former definition produced inspiring and enlightening work, often with spiritual content, but more significantly, on worldly topics vital to humanity's evolution and even survival. The expanded definition permits works containing commercially driven ersatz visions to the point where they are eclipsing the genuine ones. If this is not checked, the term Visionary Art may become synonymous with kitsch.
On another level, impractical imagination, when in the hands of greatly talented artists, seems a misuse or underemployment of such ability. In some cases, it appears like the betrayal of a divinely appointed gift. One might expect that such artists would venerate the historical notion that great talent deserves great content. On the contrary, too often I observe that the most technically gifted artists produce the most frivolous work.
We live in a civilization fraught with grueling if not insurmountable obstacles and problems. Its population seeks escapism as a coping method, which merely exasperates the problems. There is no shortage of escapist art to feed the need as it were. However, I believe it is enlightenment, wisdom, and relevant application of the imagination that affords possibilities and answers. To apply the imagination so profusely to frivolous reverie in such a world is like treating a broken bone with morphine and neglecting to set the bone and wrap the limb in a caste that it might heal.
# # #
