Speaking directly in an indirect way

Paul Deneer

Through symbolic representations, art and literature make elements from reality tangible, that would otherwise stay concealed.’ (Leibovici 2009, p. 17).

The sculpture De verwoeste stad [the destroyed city] of Ossip Zadkine in Rotterdam seems to represent the need to find a way to say what cannot be said in literal terms. It is a way of speaking directly in an indirect way. May 14th 2019 there was a ceremony around the sculpture in memory of the bombardment of Rotterdam at the same date in 1940.

One of the students from art school (see supplement 3: Response on interview questions) responded during the interview ‘my art is a way to show who I am, without having to open up’.

Dutch surrealistic painter Pyke Koch developed national socialist sympathies. He made paintings, like Marschgezang (1937), that directly reflected his sympathy. Is the fact that Pyke may not be in every way a person we can sympathise with, affecting the artistic value of his work? Is this painting a genuine artistic product or to be considered propaganda? It confronts us maybe with our own ability to allow more perspectives if it concerns these matters. Even Pyke himself possibly considered the political statement too explicit and he developed the insight that the art in this painting was defeated by the tendenz [political message], which apparently gave him a reason to destroy the painting (Rijnders 2017, p. 67).

Several objects (e.g. the dog) or aspects (e.g. posture of the hand) in the painting from Jan van Eyck: Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife (from 1434), are considered metaphors for desires, morals or just wealth (Borcherd 2008, p. 46).

One of the interviewees from art school (see supplement 3: Response on interview questions) responded: ‘I’m thinking with my hands’ and another one mentioned: ‘It’s a way to externalize instead of talking’.

‘Composing for me usually starts with reading a lot and making notes’. Interview with Louis Andriessen ( Christenhusz, NRC October 4 2018, C14).

During the interview with students (also see supplement 3: Response on interview questions) I had an interesting remark about being connected to yourself: ‘If I am in the audience - being a musician - I have a hard time not to judge or to only listen from the position of a technical expert. I find it hard to open up for the music and allow it to come in’.

Alice Miller considers Igor Stravinsky to be an example of successful mourning: ‘I am convinced that it was my misfortune that my father was spiritually very distant from me and that even my mother had no love for me. When my oldest brother died unexpectedly (without my mother transferring her feelings from him onto me, and my father, also, remaining as reserved as ever), I resolved that one day I would show them. Now this day has come and gone. No one remembers this day but me, who am its only remaining witness’ (Miller 1979, p. 43-44).

One of the interviewees (see supplement 3: Response on interview questions), while reflecting on being connected to the audience, mentioned: ‘you have to get something across to the audience; you should play a piece having a vision on it'.

The following quotes show examples of artists trying to verbalize their inner dialogue during an interview in the publication: ‘Waarom ik kunst maak…’[Why I make art] (2013):

· ‘By blowing Turisti to a much bigger format I hoped to offer a new

perspective’ (Maurizio Cattelan, p. 34).

· ‘I copy existing norms, I enlarge them or place hem in another

context, so we can rest for a while with something we normally

ignore’ (Tinkebell, p. 55).

· ‘For many artists there is a sort of trauma that you have to try to

understand’ (Christian Boltanski, p. 68).

· ‘I’m always precise in planning an action beforehand, so all the

parameters are correct’ (Francis Alys, p. 82).

· ‘All my work is about tearing and repetition’ (Adel Abdessemed, p. 98).

· ‘The themes I present in my work are big, because they deal with

humanity, with our position in the world and nature’ (Joep van

Lieshout, p. 128).

· ‘With art you can certainly affect someone’s thoughts, showing the

world in a different way to someone, but for me observing is the

most important’ (Ger van Elk, p. 133).

‘That music is a first language does not guarantee brilliant use of that language, however, any more than American children’s fluency makes them all poets’ (Solomon 2013, p. 407).

There is one famous study about the drawings of Nadia by Lorna Selfe (1977, out of print). Nadia was also presented in: An anthropologist on Mars by Oliver Sacks (1995), describing her as having a heightened sense of space and perspective. At the age of three she showed a very gifted drawing talent. It was suggested that her talent was a compensation for her ability to verbalize (Grandin 1995, p. 39). Actually when she was nine her verbal skills were more challenged and the drawing ability diminished to the level of children of nine. Pariser (1981) mentions her lack of central coherence (creating a whole from pieces of information). He warns not to assume that ‘aesthetic effects always proceed from the aesthetic causes’ (p. 27). Is her work saying what she cannot put into words? Is her product a way of connecting because other ways of connecting are difficult? Or is this just a skilful systematic representation without the intention to connect or to express something?

‘Through music the listener is able to reflect on his feeling as he could not normally do and thereby, he may come to a new understanding of it ‘ (Davies 1994, p. 271).

I stumbled on an interesting perspective in a blog on Internet: ‘the difference between art and entertainment is simply the amount of cognitive dissonance we are required to engage in by the work’ (Schulenburg 2011).

One of the interviewees (see supplement 3: Response on interview questions) appeared to be ‘standing on the bridge’ while sharing the following reflection: ‘A bad note is less disturbing than a note without purpose’.

‘Self-objectification (in the lyric, in the confession, and so forth) as self-alienation and, to a certain degree, a surmounting of the self. By objectifying myself (i.e. by placing myself outside) I gain the opportunity to have an authentically dialogic relation with myself’ (Bakhtin 1986, p. 122).

According to Eisner (2002) the art works we create speak back to us. ‘We become in their presence a part of a conversation that enables us to see what we have said’ (p. 11). Similar to Davies (1994), considering a composition to be a tertiary expression of emotions (see 3.1.2 Addressing the listener/viewer), Bakhtin’s concept of outsidedness suggests that while creating we have to be able to step outside ourselves.

Chapter 3.2

Art and inner dialogue

If inner dialogue is crucial for personal growth (see 2.1.3: Inner dialogue), is it also important for artistic growth? Does art require the artist to be in a position of inner dialogue in order to make art? Besides being in direct dialogue or cooperation with other artists, the work an artist creates - working on his own –might invite him in a dialogical position with himself or his work.

Lakoff & Johnson (1980) even claim art creates new metaphors that create new meanings, understandings and coherences (p. 235). Being a tertiary way of expressing (Davies 1994, see 3.1: Art and dialogue), these new metaphors become symbols that are being shared within a certain community, creating new rituals (p. 234) and maybe new trends. This also implies that some of the metaphors might get lost through the years or that certain people are not familiar with the rituals or conventions around a certain metaphor.

Chapter 3.2

Art and inner dialogue

If inner dialogue is crucial for personal growth (see 2.1.3: Inner dialogue), is it also important for artistic growth? Does art require the artist to be in a position of inner dialogue in order to make art? Besides being in direct dialogue or cooperation with other artists, the work an artist creates - working on his own –might invite him in a dialogical position with himself or his work.

According to Eisner (2002) the art works we create speak back to us. ‘We become in their presence a part of a conversation that enables us to see what we have said’ (p. 11). Similar to Davies (1994), considering a composition to be a tertiary expression of emotions (see 3.1.2 Addressing the listener/viewer), Bakhtin’s concept of outsidedness suggests that while creating we have to be able to step outside ourselves.

If composing sad music gets too overwhelming, it could make the composer loose himself in coping strategies that might interfere with creating something. If performing the lyrics of a song is too overwhelming a singer might start to cry and loose control, which destroys the illusion he creates. It would become a primary or secondary expression of emotions. If the listener isn’t able to step outside, sad music can make him overwhelmingly sad and vulnerable, pushing him into reactive mode.

Gert Biesta claims art requires us to exist as a subject (Biesta 2018, p. 18). For that we should not just follow our wishes and desires (c.f. disconnect from the other) or suppress them (c.f. disconnect from ourselves) but question them and transform them so they can support being in the world in a grown-up way, which he calls ‘the middle ground between world destruction and self destruction’ (Biesta (2017b, 2018, p.16) (also see 3.4: Art and mental health). He connects artistic freedom to the pedagogical ideas of Meirieux (2013, p. 131) who claims an adult way of dealing with (creative) freedom is not identical to being spontaneous (c.f. primary expression), it means seeing things from a distance, what comes from within (impulses) and from outside (influences). His description sounds very similar to the description I used earlier about a dialogical script (see 2.2.2: Scripts in a reciprocal position): being connected to yourself (inside) while being connected to what coming from the other (outside). It suggests that art requires more than just being reactive (reflexive) or expressive, artistic freedom presupposes reflection (also see 2.2.1: Scripts in an object position).

This suggests that for creating art we need a mature script that allows being connected to ourselves while connecting to others. This is a script that allows for inner dialogue.

Jeroen Lutters (2013) takes a similar position, claiming art is more than expressing a feeling, it means telling a consistent story. ‘Working from the heart doesn’t mean you can exclude reasoning’ (p. 22).

With this in mind it might seem obvious, that having a talent for virtuosity or craftsmanship is a necessary tool, but not sufficient for making art. In order to become a genius a prodigy needs more than a talent for specific physical or mental skills, it takes a mature personality.

As stated before (see 2.1.3: Inner dialogue) inner dialogue presupposes the ability to accept more perspectives, creating ambiguity or cognitive dissonance. Like in a narrative there are more layers. This creates tension. Likewise, creating art works might require a disposition to tolerate ambiguity. Research evidence is not unanimous about this: there is support for the connection between creativity and tolerance of ambiguity (Lowis, in Kaufman et al. 2014, p. 369) and there is research that suggests being able to tolerate ambiguity contributes, but is not a sine qua non for creativity (Guilford et al. 1970, p. 176; Merrotsy 2013, p. 233).There is also evidence about creative individuals being high in novelty seeking, preferring complex stimuli to familiar simple stimuli (Reuter et al, 1995). Unfortunately this also makes them more susceptible to substance abuse and addiction (Grucza et al. 2006). A divergent cognitive style is considered to be important for artistic creation, where a convergent cognitive style is linked with empirical research (McGrae 1987). Artists frequently describe their creative process as irrational, using an associative way of thinking, compared to those who systemize. ‘When we systemize we are trying to identify the rules that govern the system, in order to predict how that system will behave’ (Baron-Cohen 2009, p. 71). According to Baron-Cohenthe difference between the two is that the first option involves reflection and empathy, a position that accepts more perspectives and ambiguity. The second one is about how to gain understanding and/or control, leading to one truth (c.f. object position). Empathy implies a jump in the dark like improvising with another musician, while systemizing is being used when analysing the musical structure of a song. Interesting to note is the fact that autism tends to go along with a superior ability to systemize. According to Baron- Cohen (2009, p. 78) it might be that one of the reasons people with Asperger syndrome have difficulties with empathy is that it cannot be systemized.

Art stimulates, but also requires inner dialogue from the viewer/listener. The viewer/ listener is free to connect to the piece but also to connect to himself with his own experiences and feelings. Eisner (2002, p. 11) claims: ‘The arts are means of exploring our own inner landscape’

This however confronts the viewer/ listener with his own ability to allow something else to come in, while being connected to himself.

It also confronts the viewer/listener with his ability to accept ambiguity or cognitive dissonance. It depends on his life events, and how these events helped him to grow and be able to deal with (inner) dialogue (also see 2.1.3: Inner dialogue).

The concepts of (inner) dialogue and mentalizing both lean heavily on the ability to verbalize. Since language plays a role in having cognitions, according to Leonid Perlovsky (Masataka, Perlovski 2013), it is also responsible for creating cognitive dissonance, leading to unpleasant emotional feelings (also see: 2.1.3: Inner dialogue). Perlovsky claims music helps the listener in alleviating the stress from contradictions in his cognitions, which he thinks explains why it affects us so strongly. Apparently cognitive dissonance is easier to accept while listening to music. This doesn’t necessarily mean this music should be consonant; Perlovski argues that even dissonance in music can have this effect depending on the ability of the listener to perceive the music as something he can enjoy. Do other forms of art have a similar effect, or does art create dissonance and challenges the viewer/listener do deal with dissonance? According to Elliot Eisner (2002, P. 10) art invites the development of a disposition to tolerate ambiguity and to explore what is uncertain.

A research on people experiencing cognitive dissonance while visiting a museumrevealed that the visitors produced more consonance than dissonance in response to both historical art and contemporary art. Another conclusion was that experiencing ‘consonant moments when looking at contemporary art, dealt with the visitors capacity to recognize the symbolic aspect in an artwork’ (Émond 2002 p. 167).

Regarding symbols as well as the ability to verbalize, the use of metaphors in art can play an important role since they help to connect narratives to more symbolic representations. According to Lakoff & Johnson (1980) trough language we cannot fully communicate meaning but metaphors provide a way of communicating unshared experiences (p. 224). In visual art (and of course in other art forms as well) the use of metaphors can help to tell a story without using words (semiotics). Artists can depict metaphorical symbols or pictures, which can be taken in more than one way. This allows the viewer to become more engaged in the work because it allows him in, as well as giving him more options to connect to himself. It helps him in the search for appropriate personal metaphors that help to make sense of his live, which is according to Lakoff & Johnson (1980, p. 233) a large part of self-understanding. Using metaphors also can be helpful in saying what cannot be put into words (Eisner 2003, p. 343).

Lakoff & Johnson (1980) even claim art creates new metaphors that create new meanings, understandings and coherences (p. 235). Being a tertiary way of expressing (Davies 1994, see 3.1: Art and dialogue), these new metaphors become symbols that are being shared within a certain community, creating new rituals (p. 234) and maybe new trends. This also implies that some of the metaphors might get lost through the years or that certain people are not familiar with the rituals or conventions around a certain metaphor.

A position of inner dialogue is not always dependent on optimal conditions. Social threat in itself is not necessarily a trigger for referring to coping behaviour. According to Allan, Fonagy, Bateman (2008, p. 108) ‘even antagonistic, competitive and insecure relationships can prompt mentalizing, unless they are overwhelmingly threatening’. This also goes for artists being able to have inner dialogue (also see 3.4: Art and mental health). An empirical study of Verhaeghen et al. (2005) showed that rumination is related to both depression and several aspects of creativity. This result could be explained by the similarity between the two in being related to some sort of inner dialogue (ruminating), however the quality of the inner dialogue (see 2.1.3: Inner dialogue) might affect the outcome, in which either depression or creativity wins.

Musicians, taking part in competitions, are not necessarily forced into survival-mode, however if the affect that goes along with the situation escalates drastically, things can go wrong. They might loose the ability to remain in this meta-position and start surviving with whatever the script they developed for stressful situations tells them what to do. It is like difference between being in a labyrinth only seeing the next corner while using coping behaviour, or standing on a bridge and seeing a bigger picture.

If we loose the meta-position and our coping behaviour takes over, we experience this as something that is stronger than us. Like singers who are trying to get control over their voice and experiencing that by doing that they lose control, it creates a downward spiral. This is of course familiar to many performing artists, which also explains the multitude of solutions offered to them from beta-blockers to yoga, from mindfulness to trying to think realistically.