Monday, February 25, 2019
The Role of Art
Read this piece on Brainpickings: The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary.
In reading this piece, decide if you agree with what he is saying or not. Explain what you believe is the role of art and the artist. Then once you have explained what the role of art is society, determine if Dostoevsky has achieved your expectation of the role of art in the novel Crime and Punishment.
Be sure to include textual evidence from both the novel and the Brainpicking’s piece to support your thinking. As you go through, feel free to read your peer’s responses. If you feel so inclined, post a comment to a response. Be respectful and thoughtful in your response.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The blog post, “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” by Maria Popova, focuses on the ideals and beliefs of John Burroughs. John Burroughs was a naturalist and nature writer, as well as being one of Walt Whitman’s biographers, and made an important claim in which art is a part of culture. Burroughs writes, “Art is commensurate with the human spirit,” in which he states its importance and inclusion in culture, by creating impressions to others (Brainpickings).
ReplyDeleteI do believe that art is an important part of in life, and should be considered as culture. Both art and the artist have a role of significance in the piece, and further develop culture and reveal information. Art is not only a hobby, yet also an addition to the meanings of society. Personally, I think that the role of the art is to represent the realities of life and in which events are experienced, with the artist not only physically creating the piece, but also to stand for an individual in society. A society does not contain culture, unless the individuals within the society create art, in literal and metaphorical ways. Often in reality, there are forces that attempt to oppose or deny an idea or belief, despite the claim and evidence behind it. Burroughs claims, “A great artist does not cater to taste but creates taste, and must therefore be endowed with what Goethe called ‘the courage to despair,’ for this act of creation is invariably met with violent opposition,” in which the artist is faced with the forces of their surrounding environment, while intending for their own creation (Brainpickings). Despite these attempts to get the artist to conform to society’s pleads, a “great artist” will defy the pressures and create a masterpiece to their own degree.
Based off of the piece from Brainpickings, I believe that Dostoevsky has achieved my expectations of the role of art in the novel Crime and Punishment. The art of the novel, the significant events, are the “reality” in Dostoevsky’s perspective, when he wrote the novel. He wrote the book with a personable tone in the sense that the thoughts occurring in Raskolnikov’s mind portrayed conflict, in which individuals face inevitably. After murdering Alyona Ivanova, Raskolnikov thinks with terror, “‘Good God, am I going out of my senses?,” symbolizing the reality of an individual's turmoil with their own actions, a true piece of art, adding to the culture of society in the novel. (Dostoevsky 82). Looking at Dostoevsky from the perspective of his narrator, he is creating additions to the culture of literature through his work as a human in society, ultimately acting like my expectations of an artist.
As a general statement, Dostoevsky has achieved the expectations of the role of art through which I have formed, by his impactful decisions as an author. He has created the image of conflict within a character, like how individuals have inner turmoil within their lives, and writes with the strong perspective of being another human, observing the actions completed by his characters.
Morgan-
DeleteIn my response, I did not consider art representing the realities of life. However, this is a fair and interesting point. Meaningful, relatable art pieces, whether this be paintings, movies, novels, etc., often represent what true life looks like, rather than glorifying the individual. This can be a breath of fresh air to us as readers. For example, Raskolnikov often finds himself in deep thought, alone, or experiencing duality. Though he is an exaggeration of the average human, these are symptoms we all experience but do not often talk about. The novel embodies the role of art because it definitely exemplifies the reality that is our life.
Felicia Pasadyn's Response Part 1:
ReplyDeleteArt can be used to portray social commentary, and more often than not, this is the case. Maria Popova’s Article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” explores the remarkable impact of art on the artist, the viewer, and the entire world. A prime example of the substantial impact of a work of art is Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, which addresses politics of Europe at the time and other underlying satirical social commentary. I agree that the role of art is to question one’s surroundings without fear of backlash; Dostoyevsky’s novel absolutely achieves this role, as he questions social classes and philosophy though its chances of meeting criticism were high.
The article on art mentions the danger of art, and how artists must be willing to overcome this potential fear. Popova states, “And yet, again and again, artists embrace the danger and go on making art — this is the way the world changes, perhaps the only way it does” (Popova 1). I agree with the idea that art containing underlying topics that could be met with backlash is dangerous, and it is so incredibly brave for artists to continue to yield such beautiful works nonetheless. Acts like these do indeed change the world, however, I do not know if I can get behind the idea that art is the only way the world can progress or change. Crediting the world’s progress to one root only is a bit overreaching and lacking in evidence. I also agree with Popova’s statement, “Burroughs argues that any celebrated aesthetic or creative convention is bound to be challenged, and it is in its sublimation and transcendence that the next true art is to be found” (Popova 1). This again highlights the idea that art is constantly criticized for its ideas or details, but through this criticism, more art is found. I appreciate this statement because art, movie, and entertainment critics are often seen as the “bad guys” of the business, but in reality, they help begin conversation and move the collection of knowledge forward. As Popova implies, I believe the role of art is to make a difference or comment in the world, and the artist must both find courage to do so and willingness to have opinions on other art pieces as well.
Felicia Pasadyn's Response Part 2:
ReplyDeleteDostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment is definitely a work of art that embodies the role itself. Take for example the character Luzhin, an uptight, selfish, and arrogant wealthy businessman who wants to take advantage of the main character’s sister, Dounia. Raskolnikov, though not a completely unbiased voice, comments on the idiotic nature of Luzhin: “‘What surprises me...is that he is a businessman, a lawyer, and his conversation it pretentious indeed, and yet he writes such an uneducated letter” (3.3.109). This exhibits Raskolnikov's hatred for Dounia’s potential fiance, an the word “pretentious” rings in the sentence as well. It shows how Luzhin is flashy with no substance. This connects to the role of art and the artist because it is undoubtedly social commentary on the wealthier businessmen in Europe during the time this novel was written (mid 1800s). By portraying Luzhin in such a negative light, the businessmen in the mid 1800s are also being put down. This was a risky move for Dostoyevsky, and likely caused some negative feedback when the novel was finally published. The novel also has strong undertones of nihilism, a philosophy many do not agree with, as it rejects religious and moral principles. Nihilism is seen when Raskolnikov says, “‘But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary’” (3.5.101). Embodying what a nihilist may believe, this quote is a risk for Dostoyevsky to make his main character believe. Not only does Raskolnikov not always find himself in the bounds of morals, but struggles with faith as well. He says, “‘But, perhaps there is no God at all?’...with a sort of malignance, [and] laughed” (4.4.81). This is another nihilistic ideal portrayed through the protagonist of the novel. Dostoyevsky embodies the role of an artist through his willingness to courageously put down European businessmen of the 1800s and analyze nihilism within a life. His novel Crime and Punishment exhibits what Popova mentioned in her art article-- art truly can change the world with an idea, even if it is an unpopular one.
Felicia-
DeleteI did not think about Luzhin representing artistic motives. When analyzing a novel as big as Crime and Punishment, it is very easy to just focus on the main characters. I like how you analyzed Luzhin's character, and I definitely agree that this is Dostoyevsky's way of attacking strong businessmen. I believe that all throughout Crime and Punishment Dostoyevsky is commenting on parts of society that he does not agree with. Dostoyevsky is constantly taking risks in this novel, hoping that his form of art will have an impact on society.
In Maria Popova’s article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary,” she explores the concept of art and how it is relevant to the progression of societal change. Popova states: “Art is both foreground and background to all social change, the fulcrum by which we raise our personal and political standards, the wheel that propels every revolution” (Popova). I agree with her ideas and opinions on the role of art in society and I do believe that art does move society forward. In almost every significant historical event that has happened, art is associated with the time period that the event happened during. Whether these events are wars, movements, or major protests, some form of art is associated with them. For example, during Stalin’s rule in Russia, artists were forced to follow Soviet Union standards and receive approval from Stalin with their art. If this did not happen, they would be severely punished. However, the composer Dmitri Shostakovich was still able to write music that expressed these horrible, deprived times. His pieces made him a well known composer and this led him to receiving a spot on the national composer’s committee under Stalin. Through Shostakovich’s expression in his art, he was able to bring about social change in Russia and create a more suitable environment for all artists in Russia.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Shostakovich was stuck in an extreme and dangerous situation, his use of his artistry is a representation of the role current artists play in society. The artist is supposed to be the one who thinks of subtle ways to bring about social change in society. Even though they may not be aware that they are doing this, it is still their role. Through this their art will be the vehicle that actually brings about social change. The article states: “Burroughs argues that any celebrated aesthetic or creative convention is bound to be challenged, and it is in its sublimation and transcendence that the next true art is to be found” (Popova). By the artists making these creative pieces, they are paving the way for others to follow suit and bring about more revolution. It is rather the collective efforts of a group of artists that bring about the social change instead of just one single person starting it all. In Shostakovich’s case, he also had many other composers backing up his case and creating a cultural revolution through their music. The role of the individual artist is not to create social change alone, but rather to construct artwork that will band together other artists to form this social change.
Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment does fit the role of an artist and the fact that it can bring about social change. In the book, Dostoevsky explores the concept or crime and the opposite view from the criminal’s side rather than the victim’s. Although most believe that committing a crime is bad, the novel dives deeper into the idea of what it means to commit a crime. The way that
Dostoevsky explains the main character, Raskolnikov’s, actions and reasons behind doing the crime helps readers to open their minds and think in different ways than they are used to, This can create a shift in the reader’s overall mindset and therefore can bring about social change. Although Dostoevsky’s way of making people think differently and viewing the other side of a criminal’s mind makes a small change in the reader’s minds, collectively it brings about a large adjustment into the mindset of society.
If we are viewing art as a way to create social change, even if it is only through subtle actions, do you think that Raskolnikov considered himself an "artist" of sorts? He wrote a piece challenging the world's opinion of crime, and then attempted to experiment with that theory in what he believed to be a small way. He thought that "little people" like Aliona did not matter, and genuinely thought that the world might be better for it. Where do we draw the line between a revolutionary "new man" and a lunatic whose crazy ideas really are insane? Could Raskolnikov be seen as an "artist" according to Burroughs' definition?
DeleteIn "The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary", Maria Popova argues that art allows societies to progress and discusses the true meaning of art to the individual. She writes that "...the most visionary artists -- the seers who imagine and insist upon alternative ways of viewing and navigating the cultural landscape -- are met with tremendous tides of criticism and condemnation from the status quo" (Popova). She goes on to talk of how all will make bold decisions and with a quote by Richard Feynman, explains that all of these will eventually be proven wrong.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Popova's claims. With every turn of events, those who decide to view it different from others are often ostracized for their actions, yet they are the ones who get others to focus their attention, and eventually, make history. When we examine historical, or even modern, artwork, we tend to focus on pieces that are anything but ordinary: pieces with symbols, high contrast, and color patterns to set the mood. This helps to show a differing point of view on historical events while still allowing others to see the common viewpoint of the time.
These themes hold true to Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. In the novel, Dostoevsky examines the art behind the attempt to flip society on its head. In the beginning of the book, Raskolnikov is struggling to make ends meet, having been behind on rent for several months. In an attempt to even the playing field between the poor citizens and the rich pawnbroker, Raskolnikov murders Aliona, justifying his actions by claiming that "She lent four times less than the thing was worth, and took five or even seven per cent each month..." (1.6.6). The excuse of greed propels Raskolnikov to commit this action that would seem atrocious by society's standards, but in a twisted mindset, could be seen as public justice.
{Laura Miles Part 1}
ReplyDelete“The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary.” describes the importance of art in society and its promotion of social change. This article describes how art is considered a part of society by most, and although it is only a category in what makes up society, it is “...is both foreground and background to all social change” (Brainpickings). The article further explains that while art is often criticized and ridiculed, it is an essential part of culture and shifts in mainstream beliefs. I agree with most of the ideas that this article presents. I believe it is important to focus on art as it is produced, be it a book, a design, dance, etc. Every work of self expression has an effect on the people that experience that work, whether or not it is positive or negative and whether or not it can be comprehended by it’s audience. Art is something that can elicit discussion and can evoke emotions and start revolutions in ways that things such as sciences or math cannot. Whereas science and math can unlock the secrets of the earth, art has the power to unlock the secrets of human emotions, which cannot be defined by numbers or through logic. Although I do not believe that art is the only way to catalyze great social changes, I do believe that art possesses an ability to shape the world with greater influence than any other pursuit.
{Laura Miles Part 2}
ReplyDeleteAn incredibly influential example of how art influences individuals is Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. Although I did not personally enjoy my experience reading this novel, I do believe that the contents of the book are important in understanding social values as well as individual morals. The story follows the life of a killer, Raskolnikov, both before and after his intended murder of two women. With only this knowledge of the story, anyone would look to the killer and assume that he is a terrible man and maybe even consider him psychotic. However, this book explores the complexity of what it means to be a criminal and if a crime can also be considered a punishment. Although Raskolnikov is labeled a murderer by society, he is much more than a killer to those who know him. He is a brother, a student, a friend, his mother even refers to him as “My dear Rodia” (Dostoevsky 1. 3. 38). However, as the story progresses, Raskolnikov forgets all of these affectionate titles and becomes absorbed by the fact that he will be labeled a criminal and a murderer. This weighs down on Raskolnikov throughout the duration of the novel and leads him to become ill, avoid his friends and family, and turn to a prostitute named Sonia for consolation. Although Raskolnikov transgresses moral law multiple times in the novel, he is a character that many readers can sympathize with, despite the fact that he is a killer. Many individuals can understand the deep feelings of regret, inconsolable grief and suffering that Raskolnikov feels. However, this does not prevent a lot of readers, especially myself, from strongly disliking him as a character. His constant mental breakdowns, rash decisions and psychotic episodes make him incredibly frustrating and difficult to figure out. He contradicts himself on many occasions and walks the line between mentally ill and simply irrational on many occasions. He even goes so far as to say, “‘Why does what I committed seem so hideous to them?...Because it was a crime? What does that word mean-’crime’? My conscience is at rest’” (Dostoevsky. Epilogue. 2. 7). Because of my discontent with Raskolnikov, I believe that he is not a character that I am meant to like, despite my ability to sympathize with many emotions that he feels. I believe that Dostoevsky’s purpose in writing this story was to illustrate the contradictions and hypocrisy present within society. His conflicts with his landlady can be considered symbolic of the relationship between the lower and upper classes. Raskolnikov’s article about how specific, superior members of society are entitled to do things such as commit crimes pokes fun at the idea that those that possess a lot of money are automatically above individuals with less money. He even takes on an almost Robin Hood-like stance when he frames the murder as service to those less fortunate, “‘Kill her, take her money, dedicate it to serving mankind, to the general welfare. Well-what do you think-isn’t this petty little crime effaced by thousands of good deeds’” (Dostoevsky 1. 6. 15)? This book encourages readers to question the idea of social class and the importance of wealth in society.
{Laura Miles Part 3}
ReplyDeleteIt is also important to note that, while Dostoevsky was not known as a murderer, he and a group of prisoners were sentenced to death until they were pardoned and sent to work as laborers in Siberia (similar to Raskolnikov’s sentence). Through this fact, Dostoevsky illustrates that while the characters of this novel may seem too crazy to believe, their unbelievable thoughts and actions are what make them realistic. I believe that this book is very effective in spurring social change in that it openly discusses flaws that humans possess, yet refuses to acknowledge. Desire to carry out violent acts, lust, addiction, poverty, inequality. These are just a few of the topics expressed in Dostoevsky’s work that make people uncomfortable. These are all things that Dostoevsky experienced or witnessed in his lifetime. Although this work of art makes people uneasy, it is the kind of art that changes a person’s perspective. Despite the fact that many ideas of the book align with basic human instinct and emotion, it reveals that these instincts are sometimes hard to suppress and that society takes too many things such as gender or wealth into account when speaking about members of the society.
Part 1:
ReplyDelete“It is impossible to find an answer which someday will not be found wrong,” as physicist Richard Feynman claimed. I believe that it is time for John Burroughs’ opinion on the role of art in society to be found wrong. His ideas that art provides the vehicle for change in our world are not invalid, but they fail to acknowledge the wide spectrum of artistic intentions. Artists can be doing anything from celebrating the beauty of a life to creating a reflection of their own soul, and while it is true that any good cultural revolution has strong roots in art, this cannot be deemed the exclusive purpose of anything artistic.
According to an article by Maria Popova, “Burroughs argues that any celebrated aesthetic or creative convention is bound to be challenged, and it is in its sublimation and transcendence that the next true art is to be found” (Popova). He speaks of art having the sole mission of creating a powerful impression upon society, and personifies this property of art through his idea of a “new man” who challenges culture with his very existence. As Burroughs says, “Name any principle, so called, and some day a genius shall be born who will produce his effects in defiance of it, or by appearing to reverse it” (Popova). This suggests that Burroughs believes that the purpose of art is to challenge society’s thinking and behavior ultimately leading to change. This is one of the most powerful properties of art - it touches people universally, and though it sometimes requires courage to address controversial issues through a song or a piece, those pieces can ultimately lead to massive cultural shifts. As Burroughs claims, there are those pioneers in everything from literature to music to art to science. Everything can be considered an art, and when that “new man” enters the scene he can not only change his field, but also culture for the better. However, this view of the role of the artist is too narrow to fully appreciate the purpose of art. Many artists create in order to explore their own souls. “Graceful Ghost Rag” by William Bolcom, which is a little-known but lovely piano solo, was written in memory of the composer’s father. This composition was not intended to change the world - it was intended to become a snowglobe through which the composer could forever see his dad and share those memories with the world. Some pieces are meant to celebrate the world around us. Last year, the Wind Ensemble played a piece called “Finlandia,” which is a beautifully triumphant tone poem by Jean Sibelius. Its representation of Finnish history and pride in one’s country is not meant to challenge culture, it instead captures the joy of life. In this way, the role of the artist and art cannot be limited simply to introducing new ideas. Lasting art often has this effect, but art can have other purposes.
Part 2:
ReplyDeleteThese other purposes can be found in what Burroughs did get right. Burroughs asserted that “Art has but one principle, one aim, — to produce an impression, a powerful impression, no matter by what means” (Popova), and this powerful impression is often achieved by making the consumer of the art reflect upon how their own life is mirrored in the piece. In this way, Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment fulfills both my expectation of art and Burroughs’ expectation of art. Crime and Punishment certainly challenges societal constructs in a way that may have been dangerous in a Russia where a revolution was only just beginning to form. Whether it is presenting a prostitute as the pinnacle of humanity as Raskolnikov “told a blackguard just now he wasn’t worth [her] little finger” (4.4.100) or presenting the reader with murderers and thiefs and rapists who are constantly asking “am I a monster or am I a villain?” (4.1.8), Dostoyevsky continually challenges who we believe to be good and evil. Crime and Punishment upheaves gender roles, social classes, and simply general beliefs about humanity, allowing it fulfill Burroughs’ definition of art as cultural game-changers. It also meets my expectations for the role of art, as the depth of the characters allows the reader to relate to each one in their own way. Even Raskolnikov, the cold-blooded murderer, becomes more human as he wants to protect his sister from marrying the wrong man or when “he was glad nobody was there and he was all alone with his mother” (6.7.24), just like any child wanting to deserve his mother’s love. Though I may not agree with Burroughs’ definition of art, we could find common ground in that Crime and Punishment is certainly a lasting piece of our culture’s artistic canon.
Art is a major part of our society and culture. Its impact is seen as well, as art often challenges major ideas, and builds way to new ones. I agree with John Burroughs in that effect, and believe that Fyodor Dostoyevsky, writer of, “Crime and Punishment,” tries to be a part of that artform by creating a new way of thought through the main character, Rodion Raskolnikov.
ReplyDeleteI believe that artists should have an important role in society, and should raise some eyebrows of society. It should plant a thought into humans brains, and make them ask themselves questions about themselves and reality, even if you are the only one who is thinking. This is like when Burroughs says, “Art has but one principle, one aim, — to produce an impression, a powerful impression, no matter by what means, or if it be by reversing all the canons of taste and criticism.” What he is talking about is how art’s purpose should be to leave behind a meaning, a new thought, even if it is criticized by some. This inner thought process, or impression should really make a lasting impact on society or someone, or else the art isn’t doing its job. Art should always leave something behind, or else it is just ink, paint, sound or whatever material left on a platform to sit. Dostoyevsky, author of the great novel, “Crime and Punishment,” is an artist in his own way, by using Raskolnikov as a conduit to show his opinions.
Dostoyevsky shares many of his thoughts on society in his novel. One main points is how society interprets what is good and acceptable behavior, and what is not. In part 3, Chapter 5, paragraph 89, Raskolnikov says through Rodion, “the lawmakers and architects of our humanity, from the most ancient on through the Lycurguses, Solons, Mohammeds, Napoleons, and so forth- they were all criminals, to a man. Even if only because they violated the old law in giving a new one-law handed down by their fathers and considered sacred by society. Nor did they stop short of bloodshed if blood could be of use to them, and sometimes this blood was quite innocently and bravely shed, in defense of the old law. You might even take note that these benefactors and architects of our humanity have been for the most part especially fierce at shedding blood. I conclude, in brief, that not only great men, but even those who are just a little out of the common ruck- those, I mean, who have something the least little bit new to say- must absolutely by their very nature be criminals.” This statement leaves a though implanted about what it means to be good. Is murder for the presumed common good. His kind of negative thoughts are brought out by Raskolnikov, and leave an impression with the reader, which raises questions about the character and the author. With this, Dostoyevsky is an artist in that he leaves something meaningful behind for society to examine, making, “Crime and Punishment,” a piece of artwork.
In Maria Popova’s article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary”, the role that art has within society is claimed to be what society calls culture itself. The social revolutions and the spark that challenges conventional and accepted thinking is all brought by the creation and message of art. Popova states that art is “the wheel that propels every revolution - in thought, in feeling, in the constellation of customs, beliefs, principles…” (1), to generalize the idea of change as something that is brought about in the wave of reaction to art. I agree with the statement that art is a catalyst to change, but I also believe that other aspects of society contribute to change. I believe people can bring about change within society and one individual can define a culture. Events, whether tragic or positive, can alter the shape of what is deemed the culture of society. For example, the tragic Parkland school shooting and multitudes of other school shootings, have shaped the country’s view on gun control and the important role that teenagers and young voters play in the political arena. The video that Childish Gambino put out with the song “This is America” also catapulted the discussion of topics such as African American rights and treatment in America. Both of these examples, the Parkland shooting and Childish Gambino’s video, are not art, but both started a discussion in society and “produce[d] an impression” (Burroughs). If art is simply defined by everything that culture is and the people within society, then I too believe that art is what drives societal change. Personally, I believe art is meant to express an opinion or evoke a reaction from the audience, but people and events can do this and they can also bring about a revolution in society and its accepted views.
ReplyDeleteIn Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, the discussion of individuals as catalysts to change in society is explored through the defining of man. Dostoevsky uses this idea of an “extraordinary” and “ordinary” (247) man to question man’s role in society. He claims that significant figures in history such as “Muhammed, Napoleon, and so on, were all without exception criminals, from the very fact that, making a new law, they transgressed the ancient one…” (Dostoevsky 248), claiming that all those that challenge the societal norms will be deemed as outcasts and criminals, but only when judged by current standards. This idea is synonymous to Popova’s observation that “the most visionary artists… are met with tremendous tides of criticism and condemnation from the status quo”(1) when a new idea from art challenges a cultural norm. Both Dostoevsky and Popova recognize that there are people and pieces of art that must challenge what is accepted by society in order to change it. Dostoevsky challenges the way man is defined through literature and the existentialist theory of being an individual who breaks the status quo. That alone is art as it challenges societal views and evokes a reaction from its readers.
Within Maria Popova’s, “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” she examines and explores the role art plays in generating and persuading changes in society. Such a view is explicitly stated when Popova writes, “Art is both foreground and background to all social change, the fulcrum by which we raise our personal and political standards, the wheel that propels every revolution” (1). Such a view can be related back to revolutions, however, horrific ones. Go back to the late 1920’s Germany was falling apart and there was no sense of any association between citizens, as a result of the Treaty of Versailles. In order to unite propaganda and graffiti were presented all throughout the depressed nation and it began uniting the country who were all on the same page and a united front. The page they were on was based on Adolf Hitler's, Mein Kampf, they all comprehended the novel and made it their way of life. The combination of artistic medians was extensive: posters, graffiti, and a novel. They rallied the nation behind them and began a revolution and became a new German regime and Reich. Art has the power to express one's inner thoughts and view on any concept within the universe. However, when it is used regarding societal problems it can “propel [a] revolution” in order to make the place, the town, the nation they are within a better place, a place they believe is superior (Popova 1).
ReplyDeleteThroughout Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, the theme holds true, art and an artist can bring about social change. To establish the power within the artist Dostoevsky states, “Existence alone had never been enough for him; he had always wanted more. Perhaps it was only from the force of his desires that he had regarded himself as a man to whom more was permitted than to others” (Epilogue.2.28). They quote is relating to the views of Raskolnikov, how he could change the lives of others with the swing of an ax. Just being present in life was not enough for him but he, himself, had to impact each and every one of his surrounding citizen’s lives. Just as how an artist lives their life, they embody their views within the stroke of a brush or pen and attempt to engrave it within the interpreter’s and citizen’s lives. No matter what Raskolnikov entailed throughout the book, all the shame, and suffering, he did it to better the lives of others. Which draws parallels to Popova’s view of, “again and again, artists embrace the danger and go on making art” (1). An artist, including Raskolnikov, will perform actions no matter the consequence in order to better the society they live in and their fellow citizens.
Art, like the Islamic religion views God, is in any and all things of beauty. There is no certain shape or structure of art, which is why art provokes diverse emotions, thoughts, and actions. It does not hold a one size fit all label, and it certainly does not expect the same reaction from all. However, art will always have the expectation of making you think. Popova says, “Art, Burroughs argues, is not an isolated region of culture but is culture; not an island, but the water that washes all shores.” The best way to describe art is that it makes up all. Art makes up who we were, who we are, and who we become. Art defines us as a people, and it helps us understand our role in the world. Thus, the artist is the medium between our true role and our understanding of the world around us. Burroughs explains, “Art has but one principle, one aim, — to produce an impression, a powerful impression, no matter by what means, or if it be by reversing all the canons of taste and criticism.” An artist may not understand how neurons work or the legal system, but it is the greatest educator for life. It allows us to see what is important to us and why we find it important. Therefore, art is the best education for a full and overflowing life.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of the reaction of personal thoughts about novels, paintings, or music, people have been challenged to think. Dostoevsky in “Crime and Punishment” certainly does not fall short of the definition of artist and what art truly is. Dostoevsky claims that there are people, “who have every right to commit any kind of outrages and crimes, and that the laws do not apply to them” (3.5.91) This is never what Dostoevsky believed or what many readers believe, but it challenges the viewers to look into idealogies to see what they truly believe. Those who educate themselves in the ideals of art challenge themselves to think about other aspects and philosophies they had never experienced. Popova states, “Burroughs argues that any celebrated aesthetic or creative convention is bound to be challenged, and it is in its sublimation and transcendence that the next true art is to be found.” In Dostoevsky’s time, “Crime and Punishment” brings about an entirely different social commentary than it does now. As time goes on, people’s thoughts and ideals change, but art’s dialogue is never an irrelevant conversation worth having. Dostoevsky brings in a conversation that is extremely viable in today’s age, “the ‘extraordinary man’ has the right… that is, not the official right, but he himself has the right to permit his conscience to overstep… various obstacles, and only in the case that the execution of his idea requires it” (3.5.94). We are then challenged to ask the questions, “Do they?,” as well as apply it to social issues happening here and now. Thus, Dostoevsky is “a great artist does not cater to taste but creates taste” (Popova) and allows us to see art in a different light.
PART 1
ReplyDeleteIn it’s simplest form, art is meant to tell a story in a very creative matter, but it shows much more when analyzing it in a deeper sense. Art, according to the article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” is the ability of a piece to cause such an impression on an audience, that they are inclined to change their own ideas. Although art is sometimes only qualitatively defined, it is often much more than what is seen on the outside. More importantly, art is not a singular action, but a movement. This idea can be represented in the novel Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. As this novel demonstrates, and the article explains, art has the limited ability to promote social change in societies that need it most.
One key point in the article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” is that art has the power to change society, which is not often a simple task. Art, being universal and easily understandable, can easily impact the lives of many people. According to the article, art is “...the wheel that propels every revolution…” (Popova). Art pushes for change and uses this momentum to have a positive impact on the world around it. But why is this impact so strong? In the article, Popova analyzes the writings of naturalist John Burroughs, who writes some very impactful pieces about the influence of art. As quoted from Burrough, “‘Art has but one principle, one aim, - to produce an impression, a powerful impression, no matter by what means, or if it be by reversing all the canons of taste and criticism’” (Popova). Whether one agrees with the article or not, we can all agree that art leaves an impression. This impression can be a personal one, or a much deeper, life-impacting one. For example, look at pieces of art like “Starry Night” by Vincent van Gogh or “The Last Supper” by Leonard da Vinci. Not only are these pieces aesthetically pleasing, but they also represent much more about the time period in which they were painted. They demonstrate what was going through the artist’s mind at this time, and why pieces of art like this were so important during this time period. Changes like these, however, would not be life-impacting if they were not met with criticism. As explained in the article “It is hardly surprising, then, that at times of particular cultural tumult and social upheaval, the most visionary artists...are met with tremendous tides of criticism and condemnation from the status quo” (Popova). Criticism is but one-way artist are able to tell that their pieces have had an impact on the environment around them. Although pieces of art like those made by da Vinci and van Gogh are very important, we must also remember that literature is another piece of art that is impacting. Writers, just like artists, are “...the seers who imagine and insist upon alternative ways of viewing and navigating the cultural landscape…” (Popova). Especially during times of social change, writers often demonstrate their ability to promote change in the environment around them.
PART 2
ReplyDeleteOne author who strongly demonstrates the ability of a single novel to impact society is Fyodor Dostoyevsky. In his novel, Crime and Punishment, Dostoyevsky describes the life of a man who makes decisions according to his own ideology. This man, Raskolnikov, believes that in society there are men who consider themselves extraordinary, and because they are extraordinary, they are dismissed from following common law. The novel states “Ordinary men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law, because, don’t you see, they are ordinary. But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary” (3.5.100). Rather than outwardly expressing his opinions, Dostoyevsky uses this novel to demonstrate how he feels about superiority in the society that he lives in. During the time of this novel, Russia is undergoing some serious social changes. Although many changes are taking place, the one thing that stays the same is the governing system within Russia. By writing this novel, Dostoyevsky is going against this constant system. Rather than following the life of an ordinary man, Raskolnikov lives a life according to his own self principles. Having an indifferent mind is what sets Raskolnikov apart from other characters in the novel, and normal people in daily Russian society. The novel states “He stood lost in thought, and a strange smile strayed on his lips...he went quietly out of the room. His ideas were all tangled” (2.6.30). Through Raskolnikov, Dostoyevsky is making a social statement. Because of this Crime and Punishment is a piece of art that has a long-standing influence on society.
In “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” Maria Popova argues that the role of an artist is to challenge the status quo and in doing so push their societies forward with a new perspective. In doing so Popova remarks artists who push the boundaries “... are met with tremendous tides of criticism and condemnation from the status quo” and cites Albert Camus in saying “‘to create today is to create dangerously’” (Popova). I agree with Popova in this respect, the role of an artist should be to challenge their audience and show them the world through a new lens and to deconstruct conventionally held “norms”. This view of an artist as an agent of change both culturally and politically brings to mind Pablo Picasso. Picasso defined modern convention with his use of perspective and created a revolution in western art and his painting Guernica’s use of surrealism to convey the horrors of war made it one of the most powerful anti-war statements of the modern era.
ReplyDeleteIn “Crime and Punishment” Fyodor Dostoevsky embodies the foundational period of Russian nihilism. At the time nihilist ideas pushed the boundaries of Russian culture and as a result of the unstable political climate, artists like Dostoevsky could be sent to prison for expressing their views. The nihilists of the times stress on rationalism and anarchism can be seen prominently in the main character of “Crime and Punishment” Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov’s belief that humans can be broken up into two categories and that “Those of the second category all transgress the law, are destroyers or inclined to destroy, depending on their abilities” (Dostoevsky 3.5.107) highlights those themes perfectly. There is also a fair amount of social commentary on the bleak realities of Russian life at the time. Katerina Ivanovna is a good example of this after her husband died leaving her, penniless and dying of consumption, to care for their children she is thrown from her apartment and receives little sympathy from those around her. People even gather to gawk at her situation “... a small crowd of people had gathered. Boys and girls especially came running… Some indeed were laughing; others were shaking their heads; in general, everyone was curious to see the crazy woman with her frightened children” (5.5.41). In short, Dostoevsky fulfills the role of an artist in society by using nihilism and realism to paint a bleak and often challenging view of Russian society at that time and in doing so risked his own personal safety.
The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art brings up great points on what it truly means to be an artist. Modern day society takes art for granted which is why Popova argues that “to create today is to create dangerously” (Popova 1). He's explaining that people today do not understand the work that is put into artwork. With modern day technology, anyone can print out a piece and call it "art," but true artwork takes time and emotion. True artwork should spark an an emotion in someone that they could not achieve from looking at an effortless piece of "art" printed out by a machine.
ReplyDeletePeople often think of artwork as a picture drawn or painted by someone, but Dostoevsky confronts this idea in the book "Crime and Punishment." He forces the audience to see inside the mind of a killer. He goes through the process of the emotions one feels when one takes another's life and explains that “the darker the night, the brighter the stars, the deeper the grief, the closer is God!” (Dosoevsky 4.5). He's stating that the more grief one feels towards his sins, the closer they are to redemption. Stars cannot shine without the darkness just like good art cannot truly be appreciated without emotionless art.
The role of art, is explained in “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” as something that challenges and changes society. The role of the artist is to come up with these ideas and thoughts that question what most people accept. However, doing this can result in "tremendous tides of criticism and condemnation from the status quo" as it is difficult to deviate from common schools of thought. The art that is produced makes "the world change, perhaps the only way it does". The role of art and the artist in society is to encourage new thinking and challenge old ideas.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that Dostoevsky achieved the goal of art in "Crime and Punishment". Art promotes change and, as mentioned in above, it may be the only way that the world changes. Raskolinkov does challenge social norms and authority when he commits murder, but by the end of the book he reveals that he was the one who "killed the old pawnbroker woman and her sister Lizaveta with an axe and robbed them" (417). During the novel Raskolinkov explains that certain people should be allowed to commit crimes, including himself, and he does this to make a statement. When he crumbles at the end and turns himself in, he abandoned all of his different ideas, even though they were morally wrong. He was not able to defend his new ideas that challenged normal social behavior.
Art acts as a mirror that reflects the emotions and events of the real world. Naturalist John Burroughs claims that, "Art is commensurate with the human spirit" and that the only rule guiding art is for it to leave an impression (Burroughs). While some art such as landscape portraits capture the reality we can see and present it beautifully, other art exists in order to make commentary on or reflect the emotions of the real world. The role of art is to evoke the emotions the real world causes in a contained way. A poem about the ending of a season may prompt the same emotions of longing and melancholy we feel when we lose a loved one, end a relationship, or move on to a new chapter in our lives. The contained nature of a work of art allows us to appreciate and experience those emotions in a controlled way, which can help to understand how we feel when these emotions are evoked by real events in our lives. Burroughs writes that this emotion is art's only rule, "Art has but one principle, one aim, — to produce an impression, a powerful impression, no matter by what means, or if it be by reversing all the canons of taste and criticism" (Burroughs). There are no rules to how people feel emotion in the real world, therefore there cannot be rules about the ways art is expressed if art remains to be a way to express and explore emotion.
ReplyDeleteFyodor Dostoevsky archives the role of art as a reflection of the real world and emotion in Crime and Punishment. While Raskolnikov is a deranged murderer on the surface, we as humans can relate on a smaller scale to the emotions of victimization and superiority that he feels. Raskolnikov is established to believe he is superior to others early on in the novel, as he walks down the street he smells, "The unbearable stench from the taverns, which are particularly numerous in that part of the town, and the drunken men whom he met continually, although it was a weekday, completed the revolting misery of the picture. An expression of the deepest disgust gleamed for a moment in the young man's refined face. He was, by the way, exceptionally handsome," (Dostoevsky 6). His disgust with the lives of others and the narrator's immediate change of topic to how handsome Raskolnikov is displayshow Raskolnikov looks down upon all others. These feelings of superiority and victimization are in all of us in at least a small way, and in the art of Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky is reflecting a magnified version of a dark part we all have. While the vast majority of us will not reason ourselves into murder because of these thoughts, it takes the extreme of Raskolnikov for us to see that we to feel like the victim sometimes, we to feel sometimes feel superior to others.
In Maria Popova’s article, “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary,” she claims that art is present to change the world. I for one, agree with this statement, for change has never occurred by doing nothing. As said in the article, “artists embrace the danger and go on making art - this is the way the world changes, perhaps the only way it does” (Popova). This idea could not be more true. Whether it truly is artists that change the world or not, those who persevere through danger and strive to change the world are the ones who actually will. The role of art and the artist who creates it is to bring something new to the table, something that has never been seen before. Art needs to open people up to new ideas that they may have never thought possible. For art “is not an isolated region of culture but is culture; not an island, but the water that washes all shores” (Popova). Art has the ability to change culture and thus, it changes the world. No matter what kind of art it is, art changes the way people think. Although not always for good, art has the power to change the very world around us and those who wish to use it for good, will have a lasting impact on the betterment of humanity.
ReplyDeleteThese ideals further hold true in the novel “Crime and Punishment” by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. The art of the novel itself stands to change the way people view certain members of society by creating a new view on crime. In the novel, Raskolnikov is constantly in battle with himself as he deals with the grief of murdering the pawnbroker. By seeing into his mind, we are able to experience a different side to criminals as they may not be bad people, but instead, just did a bad thing. By using this form of art to convey a message, Dostoyevsky is able to change people’s perception of criminals (most notably Raskolnikov) to the point where we are almost sympathetic to them for what they have to endure. Dostoyevsky makes this point evident when he says, “People with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new, are extremely few in number, extraordinarily so, in fact” (Dostoyevsky 3.5.119). He was able to write about a view that no one ever had before and he changed the world for it, which is a reason why some consider it to be one of the greatest books of all time.
Art is present in our lives to change us and more importantly, change the world. This kind of thing comes with great power and those who wish to use it for good, will in fact, better humanity. Art can often change people’s views on other people and the world around them, which is what Fyodor Dostoyevsky succeeded in doing with “Crime and Punishment.” Art is truly a wonderful thing and without it, there would be no change in the world.
The article, “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” written by Maria Popova comments on the relationship between art and artists. Popova recounts several opinions centralizing around one common theme, the impact of art. Art is seen as a vehicle that compels society to move forward. Art is new, old, original, and everything in between. It was said “Art is both foreground and background to all social change” to which I feel is a true statement (Popova). Art is both past and present allowing society to move towards the future. Art is not necessarily a concept that causes people to move past what the art expresses, but start a conversation. I mean Popova mentions Burroughs said, “The new man is impossible till he appears, and, when he appears, in proportion to his originality and power does it take the world a longer or shorter time to adjust its critical standards to him.” The idea is once art is created it manifests into an everlasting object. The object changes and evolves to fit new situations to remain completely relevant. Art never goes out of style it is timeless based on the words and quotes of Popova.
ReplyDeleteThe novel Crime and Punishment written by Fyodor Dostoevsky although a written piece of text achieves the standards of art established in Popova’s article. Dostoevsky’s art is in found in the mental state of humans. His novel explores the effects of guilt and strong emotions on the brain and how they impact one’s consciousness. For example, when the main character Raskolnikov has a horrible dream about the murders he executed, “he felt utterly broken: darkness and confusion were in his soul. He rested his elbows on his knees and leaned his head on his hands. ‘Good God!’” showing he had felt some remorse for his actions (1.5.34). This example is just one of the many times humans dual nature has been expressed in literature. It may not have been an original idea by the time Dostoevsky had gotten to it, but it still stand relevant to today. The complexity of emotions and humanity are two constructs that slowly change meaning depending on the time period and the personal mindset of the reader therefore making it art. The previously mentioned scenario out of the novel also follows the belief that art is “commensurate with the human spirit” it is a reflection of each and every individual soul floating about the universe. With this perspective on art Dostoevsky undoubtedly follows at least his own form of art if not one that is believed to be true.
In the article “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary” by Maria Popova, the author argues that art is the driving force behind all advancement in society, that it is essential to progress. Specifically, she argues that “Art is both foreground and background to all social change, the fulcrum by which we raise our personal and political standards, the wheel that propels every revolution” (Popova). She takes up the argument expressed by John Burroughs, which is essentially the idea that art “is not an isolated region of culture but is culture” (Popova). He claims that it is impossible for art to be bound in an enclosure, that it is impossible for art to not experience criticism. However, through this criticism is the true beauty of art revealed; any truly amazing and world-changing piece will initially be criticized and rejected by society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this view. Personally, I think that art is subjective and can be whatever you wnat it to be. Art can be music or writing or painting or dance or anything really. If you put effort into it and can explain what it means to you, then who am I to tell you that you are wrong. Of course, I may have a differing opinion, but that does not mean that you are wrong. Additionally, I agree that one of the most important aspects of art is to challenge us, to make us think, to make us wonder and ask why. Not to play Godwin’s Law, but art of all kinds were one of the first things the Nazis banned and controlled when they seized full control. Why? Because art causes us to question ourselves and reality, to reassess how we view the world and each other.
In the novel, I see Dostoevsky try to play with this idea of art through Raskolnikov’s theory, but only slightly. In a way, one can view Rodya’s theory as a work of art. When Porfiry questions and mocks his theory, saying things like “And, if so, could you bring yourself in case of worldly difficulties and hardships or for some service to humanity - to overstep articles?... For instance, to rob and murder?” (3.5.145), this could be seen as the criticism that allows the theory to soar and rise to new heights. However, what ends up actually happening is that Rodya rejects his theory after it falls apart right before him. This is the opposite of what should happen according to my viewpoint. In a way, it could be said that Dostoevsky is saying that our experiences and how we interpret them, not art, are what fuel the progress of society.
The purpose behind an artists’ work is unique to each individual piece. What an artist wants to invoke is completely determined by them and only them. That is what makes art so beautiful and unique - anyone can make art and invoke a widespread of emotions. The role of an artist is to express their emotions, thoughts, and ideas into one composition. The role of art in society is to tell a story and leave an impactful message. The spoken art in the Brain Pickings piece is solely focused on the politics of art itself. But there are so many other aspects that surround an artists work. Art tells a story, it invokes emotions and asks questions that cause the viewer to think outside the box.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky, the way in which he writes makes the reader feel as if they were there experiences all of the things Raskolnikov is experiencing. The fright, the madness, the guilt, the love. They’re all emotions that the reader feels because of the way Dostoevsky carefully selects his diction and paints them across the page. The novel is a beautiful work of art that asks a lot of questions that causes the reader to think and it also causes the reader to feel an incredible variety of emotions from the situations Raskolnikov lives through.
PART 1:
ReplyDeleteMaria Popova, in her blog post entitled, “The Great Naturalist John Burroughs on Art, the Courage to Defy Convention, and the Measure of a Visionary,” discusses how vital art is to the societal progress. Popova believes that art helps to bring change, saying that, “a great artist does not cater to taste but creates taste” (Popova). When it comes to any sort of artist -- whether it be a musician, dancer, or painter -- the common objective in mind is to present something new, whether a fresh idea or a different take on something preexisting. Through this creation process, the artist must also be prepared to immediately defend themselves as their ideas will be “invariably met with violent opposition” (Popova). Popova believes that large amounts of confidence and courage are required to be a successful artist. Without those traits, the artist and what they represent would never be able to withstand the test of time and the protests of non-believers that come with it.
I completely agree with what Popova presents in her blog post. Being an artist takes a lot of resilience as the whole essence of an artist involves going against the current to teach what they believe in. In order to have the ability to do this, passion is essential. Art seems to have more meaning and is more relatable when it is passionate about change. Art is one of the easiest ways to communicate ideas. It requires no shared language, culture, or religion. It is limited not by political borders, but rather by the open-mindedness of an individual. If one is intelligent and independent enough to analyze and criticize society, then there is no telling how effective art can be to them. All of the people who were and are the brightest minds in the world already know this. The easiest way to see the vitality of the arts is to observe authoritarian governments. What was the aspect they targeted first when thinking about control over their people? The media. The arts would be turned into propaganda that helped to persuade the people into undying loyalty to their rulers, all with minimal unrest and rebellion. So why does that system work? The answer is simple: the average person only wants to hear things that make them feel happy and content about their life. Ideas that question the world they live in appear at first as sacrilegious and threatening to their way of life. Think about 20th century (and Russian-born) composer Igor Stravinsky. He wrote very contemporary music that questioned the strict conventions on which music was supposed to be structured from. During Stravinsky’s time, his music caused riots because they were so far from the norm, yet in the present day the very same compositions are critically acclaimed and appreciated by many. Humans as a whole are incredibly stubborn, but when push comes to shove they are willing to change. This is why patience and courage are qualities expressed by all of the successful artists throughout history. The artists must present their ideas, let them simmer, and then wait for the rest of the population to catch up, knowing that change will eventually come to pass.
PART 2:
ReplyDeleteThis very reason is why I believe Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment perfectly represents the role of an artist. Dostoyevsky presents ideas in the novel that were ahead of his time that eventually took effect. The more obvious social commentary comes through his use of strong female characters such as Dunia, Sonia, and Katerina to mention efforts during the time the novel was written (1866) that discussed gender reform and improvement of classes. These three woman defied social standards in the novel by doing jobs usually done by men. Dunia married a man she didn’t love in order to give her brother a last chance at having a financially secure life. Sonia worked as a prostitute in order to bring in needed income for the family as her father, Marmeladov, was a drunkard and did nothing productive for the family. Sonia’s mother, Katerina, was then left to take care of the entire family by herself, without the expected help of her husband. These social reforms eventually took place much later on, but could still be accredited to the efforts of artists like Dostoyevsky. Even less evident social issues seen in the novel, such as the treatments of criminals and mentally unstable (like Raskolnikov and potentially Katerina) are eventually addressed and improved by society. It goes to show just how influential artists of any time can be on the inner-workings of the world seen today.
Maria Popova is accurate in her assessment of art and the artist in society. Art is a wheel propelling change in the front and background when human power can be halted. The artist themself must change the way their own artwork is perceived. This relationship works because o f the realms in which these two devices of communication exist and their failure to break the surface between. Art is an expression of ideas. It can introduce ways of thinking, but it cannot direct in the way that an actual person's voice can. That very voice then cannot describe precisely how society is to feel about these new thoughts. The artwork shows and guides how a person is to go about life with the newly adopted philosophy. It is a cycle between the two mediums for change to prosper. Popova emphasises that, “A great artist does not cater to taste but creates taste, and must therefore be endowed ... for this act of creation is invariably met with violent opposition ” (5) They must be ready to defend the expression and provide an environment for it to be accepted and understood in. Art can then safely be the “fulcrum” of societal standards and morality (Popova 1). Thoughts can teater tatter around this fulcrum, because they have precise center of focus designated by the artist. Otherwise, they may be searching for answers to all of the wrong questions.
ReplyDeleteDostoevsky is the successful artist and “Crime and Punishment” is his artwork. In this case, his way of creating a taste is by producing characters that are acceptable in relativity to the others. The sins of Sonya are far more forgivable than those of Raskolnikov, so that her spiritual judgment is more trustworthy. Her interpretation of spiritual living and confession are considered the guideline of what Raskolnikov should follow to truly be free within himself and before God. Raskolnikov is then more relatable than Svidergalaud. His sins are -partially- products of his stressful environment and consideration of the greater good, while Svidergalaud made his decision to suround himself with temptation for his own pleasure. Society understands that Raskolnikov was overwhelmed with emotions, responsibility and questioning of his own self worth. It is harder to sympathise with a man who came to a place in order to pressure and harass women. Raskolnikov is difficult not to be fond of, so he is able to be communication device of ideas. Dostoevsky is successful in Popova’s idea of an artist. “Crime and Punishment” is a successful piece of work simply in the fact that it has shifted its role in society: “Burroughs argues that any celebrated aesthetic or creative convention is bound to be challenged, and it is in its sublimation and transcendence that the next true art is to be found” (Popova 5). Art is always shifting its role in society. This novel has lasted as prevalent work of literature though changes in accepted values over 150 years. It initially challenged, but now instills values. With Dotskovesty gone, it now up to other artists to analyze and share the philosophies he questioned in the story.