Humans are unique creatures. We differ in many ways from the other animal residents of our planet. However, our most important difference is our ability to reason and interpret. In art, the sincerest form of human interpretation and reason is manifested in a variety of media. From paintings to novels to the modern cinema, the forms and messages of art are incredibly diverse, but the pattern of its development is cyclical.
The artistic world is constantly in flux. Old ideas are continually re-examined to draw new conclusions. New ideas are built from a new thoughts or perceptions. The status quo unendingly shifts between a variety of diverse styles and genres. How does such change come about? What are the mechanisms for variance in this field? The answer derives from the force that pulls on the artistic world, the creative fringe.
It is the non-standard vision that changes our sight. It is the foreign feel of something new that sways our perception. The perpetrators of such radical designs that force us into new thinking are the daring artists. They have been a constant force throughout history in a variety of ways, through whose ideas alone change our way of perception. An example of such a daring work was David Lynch's film Mulholland Drive, screened in Shriver Hall.
Nominated for several awards at the Cannes Film Festival in France, the film drew a significant crowd here at Hopkins. The movie started fairly standard: a car crash and a disoriented woman stumbling down a Los Angeles hillside. However, as the scenes changed in a seemingly illogical and schizophrenic manner, the contradiction and loose association of the story seemed to effect bewilderment in the audience.
The confusion and swirling notions turned vocal, inspired by a few scenes of a lesbian tryst between the apparent leading ladies of the film. The movie snaked toward its "ending" by completely changing characters and story in the matter of a few minutes. Everyone seemed to walk out of Shriver Hall trying to figure out what had actually happened in the movie. Was it some sort of bizarre psychological character study? Did I accidentally fall asleep and dream that movie? Whatever the question, no one seemed to have a linear answer that explained the story or movie in a definite manner.
The questions engendered by Mulholland Drive were similar to the queries that are raised by other, more famous, works of artistic endeavor. Why does Picasso draw so abstractly? What exactly is Radiohead's music trying to say?
The answers to these questions are insignificant; the potency of the work, however, is the inspiration of the questioning. The daring, fringe and often incomprehensible endeavors of the non-standard artist and his subsequent "art" are that which keeps our statement fresh and independent.
I am not calling for anyone to appreciate or understand fringe, different art. By its very nature, the works are non-mainstream or are not meant to be understood and are therefore not "consumer-friendly." However, I do admonish people to step back and realize sometimes that the different things that inspire our questions are often the tools that will shape our perceptions. Elvis' hips changed music, Picasso's brush shaped art, and even Tarantino's camera showed us a new way to tell a story. Debatable as their specific influences may be, the overall impact and trend is clear: Radicalism inspires change.
The oddness of Mulholland Drive was severe. The thought and opinions inspired were greatly diverse. The effect of the movie, however, is not yet known. It is an amorphous effect on culture that different works bring.
A body of work and interpretation may change another in a non-quantifiable chain reaction of expressionistic movement. In the end, we look back and try to attribute what was the cause or factors in a genre, but on the larger scale we know that such engines of change are the daring new works of art.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.