distant star
I felt somewhat indifferent toward this novella, Distant Star by Roberto Bolano. It had a similar energy to the Borges book we read (which I hated) but in a more accessible fashion. I have previously encountered the Bolano Literary Universe thanks to a book we read last year in a similar class, and truth be told I don't think I really enjoy it - though I think it's slightly cool that he has his own alter ego that he puts in his stories.
The premise of this story, especially on the brutality of art front was interesting to read. As was the character of Carlos/Alberto. Having had conversations with my friends about the resurgence of true crime obsessions and how some people are drawn to serial killers, his character reminded me of those conversations. It's mentioned early on the story that the women in the group were drawn to him, and how he wasn't super friendly with the men. It's not like the women knew about his connections with all the Pinochet era killings and disappearances, but it makes me wonder about the morbid kind of charisma it takes to compartmentalise parts of yourself like that. As far as his art goes, I'm a little undecided on whether or not I consider it art. Certainly if I were to see it in person I'd be preoccupied with more pressing questions about what is running through that man's head, but given the distance I think I would not consider it art if it were real deaths. If it were staged then yeah sure it's art I suppose but not if it's real. That said, I don't think all brutal art can be discounted on the basis of its brutality. I may not personally enjoy seeing it, but I'm open to being persuaded that it's art.
I enjoyed the fact that the story was focused on artist during such a tumultuous time. As an IR student, I tend to prefer reading more about the political goings-on during a coup and dictatorship, but I value the refreshing perspective. A lot of the time, the only perspective we get about artists during this time is through their art, while this was art about art, if that makes sense. It's a bit meta but fun nonetheless.
Thinking about this a little more, I wonder about the relationship between the idea of "art for art's sake" and "art is inherently political". Are the two ideas mutually exclusive? How much of an overlap is there between the two? If we take the politics away from Carlos' photos is it still art? What does art for art's sake mean?
Let me know your thoughts!
I hope we can make you enjoy BolaƱo! You are right, Borges is present in several ways, although it is not very obvious. You are a very insightful read. The relations between art and politics are complicated, and in fact the work of authors such as Adorno and Benjamin can serve as starting points to ask ourselves about the barbaric nature of culture, about how it is an inherent part of it. It is a dialectical relationship, as they would say...
ReplyDeleteInteresting conversation, Deeba.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I would say that art is inherently political... But yet that depends on what you mean by political. For instance, I wouldn't say that the Mona Lisa is inherently political - the art itself does not intend to evoke some political stance/discussion within the observer (this is my deep intuition anyway). Of course there is art that is meant to inflame the political mind, and of course, apolitical/nonpolitical art can be interpreted as political, but these are different points entirely.
And to your final point, removing 'the political' from Wieder's photos, I would say that this is still art. In my estimation a morbid form of art (the depiction of dead women is hardly anything but morbid), yet it is art nonetheless. I... Well I don't know how to defend such a position. Maybe art, even vile/horrendous/incredibly distasteful art, at its core, aims to deliver a message, a evocation within the observer, that otherwise could not be elicited to the same degree in simple words. Music, I feel definitely does that. Same with paintings. Same with poetry (even though poetry is only words, it is at the same time more than simply words).
What is art? Who knows... But what say you... Is art inherently political?
Curtis HR