translating things, building chill software for my friends, playing ttrpgs, making procedural vector art, learning piano, writing unhinged Utena fanfics, and just vibing



love
@love
kitkat
@kitkat asked:

Do you find it more satisfying when someone responds to the themes and ideas you were intending to include in a work, or when someone finds a reading that you had never even considered during development?

When I think about the works of art that resonate with me the most, they're usually ones that present a rich enough exploration of the space of their themes that you can come to your own conclusions, rather than being didactic about it or providing tidy answers. So that's generally what I try to do too when it comes to my more serious works. I mean, not that there isn't a place for art that provides a straightforward argument and supports it with the work, what I'm more hesitant about is the idea of art that serves as a puzzle box—the idea that there's some singular "what it's really about" mystery to untangle, that art is layering obscurantism on top of something that can otherwise be concisely summarized. I think there's a purpose to art that has a singular "correct reading," but personally, I'm not so confident that I would make it. Even GITCL, which is definitely the closest I've ever gotten to didacticism, has a lot in it that comes from a place of personal uncertainty. When I make art, I'm usually trying to work through my own feelings, so I don't have a summarizing statement in mind—if I did, I probably wouldn't have bothered starting in the first place!

That said, if the audience is coming up with their own themes separate from what I put in, it's probably the case that either I've failed to convey something important, or the work isn't being met on its own level. I've encountered this in the past, and it's sometimes hard to tell what's an issue of the art not communicating itself effectively and what's an issue of someone bringing in insurmountable preconceptions. It's natural for someone to reach their own conclusions, but if they're not at least working with the questions I put down in the first place, it feels like they'd probably be happier just engaging with something else instead. It's true that art only finds its meaning when it's interpreted by an audience, that meaning doesn't exist in the void, but art isn't just a set of tea leaves to read either—if someone is projecting entire themes onto something that weren't intended, I'm not sure they'll find nearly as much insight as they would if they looked at something that was deliberately exploring those themes.

Like, don't get me wrong, I'm personally the sort of audience member who will often consider bait food. And sometimes artists really can just genuinely not realize what they're cooking with. I have definitely read works I've enjoyed greatly while also screaming "YOU ARE COMING TO THE WRONG CONCLUSION" at them the entire time. But I think it's still the case that there's much more to work with if it's at least intentionally in that thematic space. Otherwise it's just a one-sided relationship.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @love's post:

I have definitely read works I've enjoyed greatly while also screaming "YOU ARE COMING TO THE WRONG CONCLUSION" at them the entire time.

this is such a mood.