Wesley C. Rolley on sun 25 mar 01
>So, by this logic, we shouldn't use spoken language for therapy, either?
>The language of therapy is often so artless, formulaic. It doesn't measure
>up to the elegant or raw power of most literature or poetry.
It was my post which started this. Let me refer to my last statement...
"When the expression is done through good form, the result may be powerful,
but without form, it is only a personal note."
No one can ever say that Mozart, Schubert or Tschaikovsky were not
interested in form. On the same note, you could also list the late
Beethoven Quartettes. The emotional demands of these compositions requires
that the formal language of the day be extended or broken. But, it is
still consistent within the context of the works we named. What I, and I
think Mel also, was objecting to is the case where the phsychological
expression has replaced any concern for formal content, craft, etc.
Wes
Wes Rolley
"Happiness is to be fully engaged in the activity that you believe in and,
if you are very good at it, well that's a bonus." -- Henry Moore
http://www.refpub.com
Jeremy McLeod on sun 25 mar 01
> when art becomes therapy and psycho babble, the society
> winds up with bad art, and really poor psychological help for those that need it.
So, by this logic, we shouldn't use spoken language for therapy, either?
The language of therapy is often so artless, formulaic. It doesn't measure
up to the elegant or raw power of most literature or poetry.
That's an ironic statement, folks. "When art become therapy" it becomes
part of a process that is not necessarily intended to produce artful product.
It is intended to provide metaphor by which the client can enter more deeply into their
inner worlds, name what's there, and go even more deeply into "good therapy."
When the "language" for therapy is non-verbal (as in drawing, clay work,
sand table exercises, movement, drama) it has the ability to get beyond our defences
and help our unconscious speak and often does so far more quickly and deeply
than words can ever do. In these instances the arts are a tool in service of
a process that leads to growth and healing.
As an historian of both music and visual arts, I can point to many examples
of "great art" that was connected rather directly to the artist working through
some of the sorts of things for which a modern person might seek therapy.
Schuetz's "German Requiem/Musikalishe Exequien", Mozart's "Requiem",
Tchikovsky's "Pathatique"... just a few... guess I'm in musical mode today.
Does this make these works any less works of art?
There are many reasons to play in the mud. One of them is to give us access
to non-verbal expressions of our inner world. Sometimes that's for art's sake.
Sometimes that's for the process of personal psychological/spiritual growth.
Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
Rev. Jeremy McLeod
Lee Love on tue 27 mar 01
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy McLeod"
: Sometimes that's for the process of personal psychological/spiritual gr=
owth.
: Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
:
Rev. Jeremy,
I came to clay after my Zen teacher died. My whole life has be=
en a
quest for meaning. My attitude is, that if an endeavor makes better peo=
ple,
then it is worth doing. If it makes crappy people, what good is it? =
It
is something you can't measure in $$$s and =A2=A2=A2s.
BrotherLee Love
--
Lee Love
Mashiko JAPAN Ikiru@kami.com
Interested in Folkcraft? Signup:
Subscribe: mingei-subscribe@egroups.com
Or: http://www.egroups.com/group/mingei
Help ET phone Earth: http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
| |
|
