An Analytical Perspective: Central Aspects Of Art And Literature - Essay Example

An Analytical Perspective: Central Aspects Of Art And Literature The essay format has long been an element of literature. One can even contend that in Plato’s early dialogues was the seed that would develop and grow into what one cannot identify as the critical or reflective essay. Throughout this course work a large variety of essays have been read and examined for their commentary and literary value. While they have relayed a great amount of information regarding culture, politics, and the human condition, very few of them have considered the nature of art in a self-reflexive way. This essay functions by analyzing essays by Susan Sontag, David Sedaris, and T.S. Eliot, in an effort to gain an analytical perspective on what they consider to be central aspects of art and literature. In her classic essay Notes on ‘Camp’ Susan Sontag explores a particular sensibility within art that she refers to by the name of camp. As will later be demonstrated with T.S. Eliot, a particular affinity towards the ‘camp’ aspects of art is in direct opposition to perspectives that consider the highest order of art to be in the ‘classics’ or canonical literature. One of the central lines within Sontag’s essay is when she notes the nature of taste. In these regards, she writes, “To patronize the faculty of taste is to patronize oneself. For taste governs every free-- as opposed to rote -- human response. Nothing is more decisive” (Sontag). While Sontag is not directly referring to literature, here it’s clear that in articulating taste in such a way she is indicating that it is located in an aspect of thought that is entirely rooted in the intellect, as T.S. Eliot will later argue. When investigating exactly what Sontag means by camp there are a number of notable elements to consider. For Sontag, camp is the means of viewing the world, or art, in a way that does not consider it in terms of deep meaning, but rather in terms of appreciation for its superficial qualities. While one might consider that camp is restricted to a sort of high or upper class art, it’s clear that Sontag is indicating that it can refer to all types of art. For instance, in giving examples of camp art, she indicates that both the Swan Lake ballet, and the National Enquirer tabloid can be read in terms of camp aesthetics. Sontag goes on to elucidate a number of historical elements related to camp, but the underlining point remains that rather than being an ironic approach to art or literature, camp functions as a legitimate approach to judgment and appreciation. In his essay Classics and the Man of Letters, T.S. Eliot considers the nature of art, arguing that truly great art is found and based on the classics. In these regards, Eliot presents a vision of art and culture that is diametrically opposed to that found in Susan Sontag’s essay. Eliot begins his address examining the view of the poet as central to literature then examines literature as “merely a succession of great writers, instead of looking at the literature of one European language as something which forms a significant whole in itself” (pg. 7). Eliot argues that in this poetic concept, the writer’s shortcomings in education are excused and merely attributed to his ‘genius;’ instead, Eliot argues that despite the undeniable success these writers have achieved through their creative works, they oftentimes remain flawed in certain respects as they lacked a education in classic literature, or associated with the wrong people, “The life of a man of genius, viewed in relation to his writing, comes to take a pattern of inevitability, and even his disabilities will seem to have stood him in good stead” (pg. 7) Rather than excusing these faults, they should be recognized as hindering the writer’s realization of their full literary potential. Eliot continues to argue about the central importance of classic literature to art. In one of the central statements of his argument Eliot states, “The continuity of a literature is essential to its greatness; it is very largely the function of secondary writers to preserve this continuity, and to provide a body of writing which is not necessarily read by posterity, but which plays a great part in forming the link between those writers who continue to be read” (pg. 8). After a discussion on the merits of reading Shakespeare and the Bible, as both were informed by a pantheon of scholarship, Eliot goes on to address the qualitative nature of the education that he believes is most appropriate. For him literature goes beyond merely creative writing and instead resides in these classic elements of literature; he argues, “We are then justified in inquiring what is likely to happen, to our language and our literature, when the connection between the classics and our own literature is completely broken” (pg. 13). Eliot goes on to offer a qualitative statement on the aesthetic nature of art, “The novelty of a work of imagination which is only popular, and has nothing really new in it, soon wears off: for a later generation will prefer the original to the copy, when both belong to the past” (pg. 15). That is, while popular fiction (today largely embodied in mainstream film and television) is immediately appealing, it is merely a facsimile and as soon as its immediate social references wear off, so does the cultural artifact. Ultimately for Eliot then, true literature has within it knowledge of the past and as such the greatest art is classic literature. The final essay analyzed is David Sedaris’ Music for Lovers. In this essay Sedaris considers his appreciation for musician Anita O’Day. While the essay doesn’t overtly discuss the nature of art and culture, through considering Sedaris’ various points one is capable of discerning his particular sensibilities in respect to those of Sontag and Eliot. Through reading Sedaris’ essay it’s clear he has great appreciation for O’Day; he mentions listening to her on the radio many times and being drawn to her television interviews. While comedic in tone, the essay contains direct insights into what Sedaris appreciates in music. He writes, “When I listen to music I like to relax and imagine my place in it. I believe that this is fairly common. I like to imagine myself as the vocalist or, if the singer is a woman, I pretend that I wrote the song and play all of the important instrumental solos” (Sedaris). Later in the essay Sedaris goes on to criticize his friend’s taste in music. When he does so he refers to the eccentric and strange aspects of the rock music. In these regards, it’s clear that Sedaris doesn’t appreciate this music, as he is not able to imagine himself in the place of the musicians. When one considers Sedaris stance on music, it’s clear that it is in opposition to that of Sontag’s and Eliot’s. The two previous writers sought means of appreciating art based on an aesthetic principle; conversely Sedaris is attempting to appreciate art through his ability to viscerally relate to it and envision himself in the position of the musicians. In conclusion, it’s clear that the essays analyzed all consider the nature of art from different perspectives. Sontag’s essay presents a view of art as camp, wherein it is appreciated for its superficial elements. T.S. Eliot argues that art should be appreciated for its deeper meaning and relation to classic literature. Finally, David Sedaris appreciates art based on its ability to appeal to him viscerally and to relate to the musicians. Ultimately, it’s clear that there is no correct way to interpret or appreciate art, but that through the conglomeration of these perspectives, we can achieve added insight into the ways and reasons people enjoy things. References Cohen, Samuel. (2010) 50 Essays: A Portable Anthology. New York: Bedford. Eliot, T.S. (1942) The Classics and the Man of Letters, Oxford. (ed. J. Hayward, 1953) Selected Prose, Harmondsworth. Read More