By Amanda MacBlane<\/p>\n
Hickey’s interpretation of the dominant-submissive dynamic between a
\nwork of art and its beholder, drawing on Gilles Deleuze’s analysis of
\nMasoch and Sade, claims that:<\/p>\n
\nThe traditional, contractual alliance between the image and its
\nbeholder (of which beauty is the signature, and in which there is no
\npresumption of received virtue) has been supplanted by a hierarchical
\none between art, presumed virtuous, and a beholder presumed in need of
\nit. This is the signature of the therapeutic institution.” <\/p><\/blockquote>\nMore succinctly, Hickey contends that beauty requires that a beholders relationship to a work be based on free consent, while the experience of art in the institution leaves us victimized–“ignored, disenfranchised, and instructed. Then we are told that it is ‘good’ for us.”
\n
\nGoing back to the very first post, trying to see if Hickey’s argument
\nholds true in the world of “abstract, instrumental music”, in order to
\ndraw a parallel we would look at the relationship between the work and
\nthe listener. Yet, there is something missing from the equation. Music
\noffers a way into the work that visual art does not–performing.<\/p>\nAs a musician, whether or not the actual piece of music is immediately
\ngratifying, playing it is often a pleasure. Performers, by their very
\nnature, are both submissive to the work and enfranchised to develop
\ntheir own interpretation. I don’t think that it is a coincidence that
\npieces I’ve played often stick with me longer than pieces I’ve just
\nheard. The simple experience of playing music, makes you listen to it
\ndifferently than a non-musician would. I would never say that my
\nopinion is therefore more valid than a non-musician’s, just that what
\nI want from the music–what will bring that pleasure and
\ntransformation–might be different.<\/p>\nFurthermore, music (instrumental or not) is capable of eliciting
\nemotions without requiring that we rationalize them or assign them a
\nverbal meaning. Like Elvis Costello said, “Writing about music is like
\ndancing about architecture.” Just because there isn’t a blatant
\nmessage that can be summed up in words doesn’t necessarily mean that
\nnothing is being communicate and a musician is more likely to be in
\ntune with this as they spend hours living with a piece to determine
\nhow to interpret it.<\/p>\nSo having lived in this musician’s dynamic for so long, as I imagine
\nmost of the other book club participants have, I do not necessarily
\nexpect or desire an immediate grasp of the
\nart\/music\/film\/dance\/theater etc. that is set before me. Part of the
\npleasure I get is from the puzzle–figuring it out, adding my own
\ninterpretation, trying to link it to the world around me. While
\ninstitutions might try to control what I see, it is a personal
\ndecision to submit to their teachings.<\/p>\nOf course this doesn’t solve the mystery of why some things beckon to
\nme, while I simply say “sayonara” (thanks Marc G.!) to others. I guess
\nthat is up to me. In the end, it’s hard to shake off the values that
\nhave been beaten into us including that “beauty is in the eye of the
\nbeholder” and, in my life, I am that beholder.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"By Amanda MacBlane Hickey’s interpretation of the dominant-submissive dynamic between a work of art and its beholder, drawing on Gilles Deleuze’s analysis of Masoch and Sade, claims that: The traditional, contractual alliance between the image and its beholder (of which beauty is the signature, and in which there is no presumption of received virtue) has […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-168","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-bookclubii","7":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=168"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=168"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=168"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/gap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=168"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}