Concerning The Spiritual Inward Art

A summary of:
Kandinsky, W. (1912). Concerning the Spiritual inward Art: too icon inward particular. George Wittenborn, Inc.: New York.

“Only but immediately awakening after years of materialism, our soul is infected alongside the despair born of unbelief, of lack of purpose too aim. The nightmare of materialism, which turned life into an evil, senseless game, is non yet passed; it even so darkens the awakening soul…. Our soul rings cracked when nosotros audio it, similar a precious vase, dug out of the earth, which has a flaw” (24).

It’s clear that whatever give-and-take of spirituality – too the lack thereof embodied inward engineering scientific discipline – must include to some score a give-and-take of materialism. While a flake hyperbolic, I do similar the to a higher house quote.

The challenge – i recognized early inward this procedure – is that making engineering scientific discipline to a greater extent than spiritual is non an exercise inward turning dorsum the clock. Consider these wise words: “Every piece of work of fine art is the kid of its time; oft it is the woman parent of our emotions. It follows that each menses of civilization produces an fine art of its own, which cannot live repeated. Efforts to revive the fine art principles of the yesteryear at best create industrial plant of fine art that resemble a stillborn child” (23). As it relates to this task, nosotros cannot aim to insert the same form of spirituality that nosotros seat as immediately missing from technology. We take away keep to come upwards up alongside a unique solution that fulfills a contemporary spiritual void.

Kandinsky raises the inquiry of responsibleness alongside regards to one’s creations. He quotes 2 rattling unlike perspectives: 1) “’To ship low-cal into the darkness of men’s hearts – such is the obligation of the artist,’ said Schumann” (25); 2) “’A painter is a human being who tin pull too pigment everything,’ said Tolstoi” (25). Kandinsky suggests that the latter Definition prevails inward the public (or it did inward the early 20th Century); too nosotros tin notice bear witness of this inward VR’s quest for simulacrum, non meaning. For Kandinsky, this is the sin of self-indulgent fine art (26): “This annihilation of internal noise that flora the life of the colors, this dwindling away of artistic force, is called ‘art for art’s sake’” (26). VR programmer larn drawn into the fun too excitement of creating e'er to a greater extent than perfect simulations, but as artists larn drawn into the technique, thusly: “Out of composition inward apartment triangles has developed a composition alongside plastic three-dimensional triangles, that is to say, alongside pyramids; too this is cubism. But hither a vogue has arisen toward inertia, towards a concentration on sort for its ain sake, too consequently i time again a reduction of potential values. But that is the unavoidable outcome of the external application of an inner principle” (67). The employment is that when nosotros focus on the technique, nosotros lose sight of the purpose (compare this to Ellul’s ‘la technique’): “…at those times when the soul tends to live choked yesteryear materialist lack of belief, fine art becomes purposeless, too it is said that fine art exists for its ain sake alone. The relation betwixt fine art too the soul is, as it were, doped into unconsciousness” (74-5). In a nutshell, I fright this is what’s happened alongside technological development, too it is a symptom of working from the premise of Developing Because We Can, instead of Developing Because We Should. Or as Kandinsky says so eloquently of fine art (and I’m making the instance that it applies as to technology): “In such periods fine art ministers to lower needs too is used for textile ends. It seeks its content inward unsmooth substance, because it knows nix fine. Objects remaining the same, their reproduction is watch to live the aim of art. The inquiry ‘what?’ disappears; only the inquiry ‘how?’ remains. By what method are these textile objects reproduced? The method becomes a rationale. Art loses its soul” (28). Insert technology: engineering scientific discipline loses its soul.

Kandinsky argues that “Today nosotros are seeking the route which is to Pb us away from the external to the internal basis” (54) (compare to the ‘subjective turn’ inward Heelas et al., 2007) too “The starting-point is the written report of color too its effects on men” (54). He talks nigh color as conveying data inward the sort of feelings to people – a sort of subconscious communication. E.g.: “Blue is the typical heavenly color; the ultimate feeling it creates is i of rest. When it sinks almost to black, it echoes a grief that is hardly human. It becomes an interplanetary space engrossment inward solemn moods. As it grows lighter it becomes to a greater extent than indifferent too affects us inward a remote too neutral fashion, similar a high, cerulean sky. The lighter it grows, the to a greater extent than it loses resonance, until it reaches consummate quiescence, inward other words, white. In music a low-cal bluish is similar a flute, a darker bluish a ‘cell; a even so darker the marvelous double bass; too the darkest bluish of all – an organ” (58-9). This instance is as unopen as I take away keep yet come upwards to what I hateful when I verbalize nigh “spiritual engagement” alongside technology. What emotions/experiences does this appointment evoke? – too could nosotros seat these as beingness uplifting, or fulfilling a human need?

Similarly, Kandinsky touches on this spiritual appointment when describing the experience of listening to Mozart: “Perhaps alongside envy too alongside a mournful sympathy nosotros psyche to the music of Mozart. It acts as a welcome interruption inward the turmoil of our inner life, as a consolation too as a hope, but nosotros hear it as the echo of something from some other historic menses long yesteryear too fundamentally strange. (65-66) / The strife of colors, the sense of the residue nosotros take away keep lost, tottering principles, unexpected assaults, swell questions, manifestly useless striving, tempest too tempest, broken chains, antitheses too contradictions – these brand upwards our harmony. The composition arises from this harmony is a mingling of color too drawing, each alongside its split upwards existence but each blended into a mutual life, which is called a moving icon yesteryear the strength of internal necessity” (66).

Kandinsky makes this assertion: “Matisse – color. Picasso – form. Two swell signposts pointing toward a swell end” (39). Consider how this applies (according to him) inward a piece of work of art: “A warm cherry note (acting as an irritant inward isolation) volition materially alter inward internal value when it is no longer isolated as an abstract tone, but is applied as an chemical factor of some other object too combined alongside natural form. Combining cherry alongside diverse natural forms volition also campaign unlike spiritual effects, all of which volition harmonize alongside that of the original isolated red. Suppose nosotros combine cherry alongside the sky, flowers, a garment, a face, a horse, a tree. / Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 cherry sky suggests to us sunset, or fire, too has a consequent outcome upon us – either of splendor or menace….” (69). This suggests 3 questions worth considering: 1) Are at that topographic point technological analogs to “color” too “form”?; i.e. what are the edifice blocks which, if combined i way as opposed to another, create either a spiritual or non-spiritual result? 2) Is some of the supposed “spiritual” experience of i combination to a greater extent than to do alongside subjective interpretation combined alongside a flair for linguistic description to brand this case?; i.e. how tin you lot substantiate your claims nigh i engineering scientific discipline beingness to a greater extent than spiritual than some other without relying on fertile linguistic communication to do so? 3) Fundamentally, do nosotros experience engineering scientific discipline as nosotros experience art? – especially since i is theoretically primarily functional piece the other is primarily aesthetic; i.e. is this technology/art comparing fair? – is at that topographic point the same potential inside engineering scientific discipline to evoke emotions, or are at that topographic point unlike expectations for our engineering scientific discipline that nosotros can’t larn around? – is at that topographic point the same potential for both to evoke psychological effects (44)?

This writing also inspires questions nigh how to move nigh designing radical technological conception may take. Kandinsky writes: “It is clear, therefore, that the selection of an object (i.e., i of the elements of form) must live decided yesteryear a purposive vibration inward the human soul; therefore, the selection of the object also originates from the regulation of internal necessity. / The freer the abstract form, the purer too to a greater extent than primitive the vibration. Therefore, inward whatever composition where corporeal sort seems superfluous it may live replaced yesteryear abstract or semi-abstract form” (50). This implies that the outset pace inward the procedure is to determine (somehow!) what it is that vibrates inward the human soul – which is a poetic way of proverb that pace i is to discern our human values. Step 2 would so live finding a way of abstracting those values too representing them inward the technology. (I would also add together that at that topographic point needs to live a pace 3 of making those values explicit as good as subconsciously represented.) Now nosotros take away keep guidelines for ‘good’ or ‘bad’: “If its sort is ‘poor,’ it is besides weak to telephone weep upwards forth spiritual vibration. Likewise a moving icon is non necessarily ‘well painted’ if it possesses the ‘values’ of which the French so constantly speak. It is only good painted if its spiritual value is completed too satisfying” (74). We should live putting inward the form of thinking piece of work that Kandinsky has pose into the composition of a icon – it is as important, to a greater extent than so even, to pose this attempt into thinking nigh what we’re doing alongside engineering scientific discipline too what spiritual effects it volition take away keep on us.

Kandinsky makes some other of import indicate nigh the demand to forget conventions (this mightiness as live described as Beginner’s Mind inward Zen terms): “The creative individual must ignore distinctions betwixt ‘recognized’ or ‘unrecognized’ conventions of form, the transitory cognition too demands of his item age” (53). So what does i follow? Much inward occupation alongside the ‘subjective turn’ (which technically happens much afterwards than Kandinsky wrote this), his inspiration must come upwards from within: “He must sentry his ain inner life too hearken to the demands of internal necessity. Then he may safely employ way sanctioned or forbidden yesteryear his contemporaries. This is the only way to limited the mystical necessity. All way are sacred which are called for yesteryear internal necessity. All way are sinful which are non drawn from inner necessity. (53) / It is impossible to theorize nigh this ideal. In existent art, theory does non precede exercise but follows it. Everything is a affair of feeling. Even though the full general construction may live formulated theoretically, at that topographic point is even so an additional something which constitutes the soul of creation” (53-4).

Another indicate that the creative individual makes is that the materialist historic menses has produced a form of receptive passivity, something which nosotros could debate is also truthful alongside regards to our uptake of technology: “Spectators are besides accustomed to looking for a ‘meaning’ inward a picture, i.e., some external relation amid its diverse elements. Our materialist historic menses has produced a form of spectator, a ‘connoisseur,’ who is non content to house himself inward forepart of a moving icon too permit it speak for itself. He does non search for the internal feeling of the moving icon direct for himself, he worries himself into looking for ‘closeness to nature,’ or ‘temperament,’ or ‘handling,’ or ‘tonality,’ or ‘perspective,’ too so on. His optic does non probe the external facial expression to move far at the internal significance. In a conversation alongside an interesting person, nosotros endeavor to larn at his telephone substitution ideas too feelings. We do non bother nigh the words he uses, nor his spelling, nor the breath necessary for speaking, nor the movements of his natural language too lips, nor the psychological outcome on our brain, nor the physical audio inward our ear, nor the physiological outcome on our nerves. We realize that these things, though interesting too important, are non the problem. The pregnant too ideas are what concerns us. We should take away keep the same mental attitude when confronted alongside a piece of work of fine art if nosotros are to absorb its abstract effect. If this mental attitude e'er becomes general, the creative individual volition live able to dispense alongside natural forms too colors too to usage purely artistic means” (70). Again, this suggests our obsession alongside la technique (Ellul); too it blinds us from seeing, inward the instance of technology, the inherent meaninglessness. In other words, nosotros are dazzled yesteryear the features of the engineering scientific discipline (e.g. shroud resolution, difficult drive size, etc.), pointing at these features alongside reverence, thinking that they are meaningful inward too of themselves (as bear witness of human ‘progress’), meanwhile never yell for the deeper questions about, ‘Well, what does it actually mean?’ In our idolization of technology, inward our reverence of la technique, nosotros take away keep forgotten this: “The creative individual must take away keep something to communicate, since mastery over sort is non the terminate but, instead, the adapting of sort to internal significance” (75).

Kandinsky’s promise that “an historic menses of witting creation” (Constructionists), as opposed to divine inspiration (like the Impressionists), is leading us towards “an epoch of swell spirituality” (77) mightiness render yet some other lesson for us inward price of technological development. Rather than but jumping correct into development, nosotros demand to live considered inward our approach, actually yell back nigh what nosotros desire to pose inward our engineering scientific discipline too what outcome it volition take away keep of the receiver/user.