I ran across this yesterday. The following is from a 1920’s lecture presented by Yevgeny Zamyatin at the House of the Arts in Petrograd:
The development of art is subjective to the dialectic method. Art functions pyramidally: all new achievements are based on the utilization of everything that has been accumulated below, at the foundations of the pyramid. Revolutions do not occur here; this field, more than any other, is governed by evolution. And we must know what has been done before us in the field of verbal art. This does not mean that you must follow in trodden paths: you must contribute something of your own. A work of art is of value only when it is original both in content and in form. But in order to leap upward, it is necessary to take off from the ground. It is essential that there be a ground.
Ugh, it’s way too early for deep thoughts. I’ll comment later when the brain is functioning…
Comment by Kimberly — April 19, 2007 @ 6:59 am
Kimberly, I’m not proud — I admit to having to look dialectic up in the dictionary. :mrgreen: Past that first sentence, though, it’s easy reading but it made me think.
Comment by Jennifer — April 19, 2007 @ 7:25 am
I’m going to reread this after 10AM when my grasp of the English language had evolved. :zzz:
Comment by Andrea — April 19, 2007 @ 7:40 am
Since you went to the trouble to look it up, you could have included the definition of “dialectic” in your post.
I’m still trying to find out where the ground is.
Comment by Marilyn — April 19, 2007 @ 7:56 am
This is very deep and sounds significant, and while I have a general idea as to what it means, it’s too early in the morning to try and boil it down. Basically I think it means that all art is original, but it’s formed from concepts of other art…so it isn’t?
Precious could figure it out.
Comment by Rhonda — April 19, 2007 @ 8:45 am
How’s this: Art is not created within a vacuum, because the artist does not live within a vacuum. She is a product of the art that has come before; it shapes her, but it is her responsibilty to approach her own art from her unique perspective. By not copying what has come before, but instead learning from others, she helps evolve the art into something new.
The base of the pyramid should continue to grow…so the pyramid is getting both wider and taller as art evolves.
Or something like that :thumbsup:
Comment by Kimberly — April 19, 2007 @ 9:24 am
LOL Andrea and Marilyn. Dialectic — of, pertaining to, or of the nature of logical argumentation.
Rhonda, Precious could probably give us a class in it. :idea:
Kimberly, I think that’s it. I also think it means that our personal initial art may be rudimentary but that’s a necessary component of it growing and evolving.
Comment by Jennifer — April 19, 2007 @ 9:54 am
So, its ok if my writing sucks because its a building block for me to suck less in the future? :?:
Comment by Andrea — April 19, 2007 @ 11:25 am
Andrea, I have read your writing and you FAR from suck. You are extremely talented.
Comment by Rhonda Nelson — April 19, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
That’s what I tell myself, Andrea — suck today to build greatness tomorrow. :thumbsup:
Comment by Jennifer — April 19, 2007 @ 2:28 pm