Does an artist create an art or an art creates an artist?

We can call an art as the expression of a person’s metaphysical belief system in the form of selective recreation of the reality, whatsoever the art is. A person who performs or creates an art is called as an artist. But the word artist or the concept of an artist emerges from the concept of art which is selective recreation of reality irrespective of the person who creates it (the psycho epistemological condition of an artist might be a criterion, but in this context I refer only to the esthetic importance of art). When an art is created the person who creates that particular art becomes an artist, which means art is the central power or the root from which all other terms such as an artist etc., emerge. But the concept of art emerges from the human thought process. This means that a thought process of particular kind results in the formation of an art. Hence the thought process from which an art emerges should also be a point of preponderance.

      An artist is the person who creates an art. Therefore we can assert that a person who creates any kind of art is an artist. But after creating an art a person would become an artist. Any kind of art has its inception from the thought process of a person who creates the particular art. Therefore if the thought process is not recreated to form reality then the art doesn’t come into existence it merely remains as an abstraction in the mind of that particular individual. Even though it merely remains as an abstraction it still serves as an idea or insignia for an art to take place or it can also be said as the very art itself. Even though it has not been recreated it has somehow or the other been analyzed or lingered upon, which results in the formation of an art in the mind of that particular individual. As he has not brought his abstractions into a practice of making them a reality it doesn’t become a complete art and it still remains as an art in the mind of that person. An artist is a term which serves as a general reference to the people and it also serves as an acknowledgement saying that the person created an art.              Hence he becomes an artist. Therefore many people can have the view or the idea of an art but are not in a position to express or bring it into reality; hence they remain as normal people but not artists to the outer world.

         Hence I feel that a person who has an idea of art as well as the aptitude to make it a reality can be called as an artist. A person who has the creative ability of making an art but cannot turn it into reality cannot be an artist. But that kind of person results in the intrinsic meaning of an artist, but it does not serve as acknowledgment of that person’s art to anyone. An artist is the term whose purpose is to become an acknowledgement of a person’s art; it is not fulfilled in this particular context if he cannot recreate it; hence he cannot be called an artist.

 “Therefore an art is the whole criterion from which an artist emerges.”

P.S: The above interpretation is what I believe. It might contradict with your own views. This question is made up of two paradoxical abstractions hence the answers or interpretations are vice versa.  


                                                                                                      -NAGA PRAMOD

One thought on “Does an artist create an art or an art creates an artist?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s