The universal thing shared by talents can not be popularized among the public. The fact that people have different levels of intelligence is the same as that there is a gap between people’s strength. Those with strong strength can easily heft heavy things, while those who are weak can not hold even a feather. This is congenital and can not change compulsively. So does wit. The wise can make it without learning, while the fool can not, even though they study on it. This has been written in their genes and can not be compelled to alter. Acquired exercise can strengthen the weak, and acquired education can make the fool become wiser. But it’s just somewhat “helpful”. It’s hard to make it reach a certain high level. Moreover, “art” is the highest and deepest thing in all spiritual undertakings. It is obviously unreasonable and impossible to make it popular with all people, as if you can not force all people to lift heavy things. Personally, I talk about this art in a strict and narrower sense.
In a loose and broad sense, art is something of skill. In some ancient Chinese books, medicine and divination, potting, chess, tea ceremony, wine ceremony, magic tricks, conjuring and so on are all attributed to art. The definition of this “art” is distinctly different from the former. When hearing this, some artists might be extremely annoyed. Because they all agree that art should be consistent with the earlier definition, and it is a sacred and inviolable cause; “Life is short, but art is long. The work outstays the worker.” However, the fact can really drive them mad: nowadays, more than half of the people in our country have never heard of the word “art”. I’m afraid that more than half of the people understand “art” according to some kinds of ancient books (in this way, only less than half of the people know what the artist’s so-called “art”. Actually, I think it is barely half of that ). As long as you hear the general public talking about “art”, you can have a glimpse of their understanding of art. When they see a beautiful thing, they will utter “it is artistic”; when they see a fashionable thing, they will say “it is artistic”; when they see a rare thing, they will apprise it and say “it is artistic”; and when they see a modern thing, they will emphasize it and say “it is artistic”. For those who are ignorant, abusing the word “art” is a fashion. As for shops, it is original to abuse the word “art” in advertisements. The advertisements of items about beauty, romance and carnality are often crowned with the word “artistic”. A funny thing once happened to me: a young gentleman who met me for the first time, seeing me wear a beard and old clothes, said in surprise, “Look at you! You really don’t look like an artist!” I had nothing to say. But from his words, I knew exactly how he would interpret art. Perhaps he noticed that I had a lot of works on art and had heard people say that I was an artist, so in his mind, I should be an outstanding artist. And what his so-called “artistic” was probably some characteristics like being pretty, beautiful and modern. So when he saw my appearance at that time, he felt disappointed. I don’t consider myself as an artist, and I don’t think that I look like an artist, so I have nothing to do with his judgment, but to know his own understanding of “art”. This opinion, though funny, can not be considered completely wrong. Because, as has been mentioned above, in the loose and broad sense, pretty, beauty and modernity are also regarded as features of “art”, but the “art” they belong to is not the art I am talking about. Therefore, according to the current situation, what most superficial and shallow people call “art” and “artistic” refers to things that are pretty, fashionable, rare, modern, beautiful, novel, even sexual, romantic and carnal. In short, things that can attract their attention and entertain their ears, eyes and all their senses are said to be “artistic”. This definition is quite different from the foregoing strict art. They not only have few things in common, but sometimes are opposite, for example, following fashion blindly. If something is not original or beautiful in the strict sense of art, there will be a general affirmation that it is artistic. On the contrary, if ordinary people can not understand the profound masterpieces of literature and painting, they will believe that those works are not art. Therefore, if we want to popularize the “mass art”, there are only two ways to go: improving people’s comprehension, or lowering the threshold for art. To improve the public’s artistic understanding just from one side, as has been mentioned before, is obviously as impossible as to force all people to lift heavy things. It’s necessary to lower the threshold for art. If we start unilaterally, it is bound to make art such a shallow thing as mentioned above, which is not what culture lovers intend. The eclecticist said that both sides should take actions. We should enhance people’s understanding to some extent, and at the same time, relatively reduce the threshold for art. With a mutual compromise, we can find the mass art for the public. The idea sounds feasible in theory. However, how to improve and how to reduce in real world is really a big problem. What’s more, it’s hard to see any specific discussions on this issue. What can be seen is that a great clamour has arisen around the topic of “mass art”.
I am not going to discuss this in detail now, because I incline to a strict artistic interest; while for ordinary people, they have few opportunities to get close to art, and what those advocators see is only superficial, so they fail to have a deepening knowledge of the public’s psychology. Empty talk can not make up for the fact. Therefore, the specific discussion on this issue calls for people who understand both art and the public to get involved. What I want to discuss now is what kind of art that modern people can understand, and what kind of art they are closest to, based on superficial observation. It’s just a reference for people who advocate art for the public.
(Excerpted from Feng Zikai’s Art for the Public)
