6. Asking better questions about quality – Francois Matarasso

As a reaction to François Matarasso’s seminar based around the quesitions of “asking better questions about quality”, I decided to search for my own understanding of quality.

François Matarasso outlined following criteria for finding the quality in the artwork:

• technique – mastery – is this work in its own class well done – does it demonstrate mastery against others in the same field?
• originality – original to be true to ourselves because we are all different?
• integrity
• ambition – is it pushing the boundaries?
• resonance – does it connects with something, does it carry experience to the audience?
• sense of intangible – does it get under our skin, does it stick with you

These criteria are the framework for better conversation which shape our understanding and allows us to base our appreciation of art on these pillars which are structuring the conversation between art and its audience. That is why I am going to delve into my personal understanding of quality and will try to challenge some of these criteria with my own understanding of quality in art and especially its relation to knowledge.

François Matarasso presented an idea; the quality measurement could be based on human innate social tools which encourage our perception of quality in the experience rather than the object itself, where the experience could be seen as artist’s experience as well as viewer’s experience.

Bernard Brenson: In visual art the aesthetic moment is that flitting instant, so brief as to be almost timeless, when the spectator is at one with the work of art he is looking at, or with actuality of any kind that the spectator himself sees in terms of art, as form and colour. He ceases it be his ordinary self, and the picture or building, statue, landscape, or aesthetic actuality is no longer outside himself. The two become one entity; time and space are abolished and the spectator is possessed by one awareness. When he recover workaday consciousness it is as if he had been initiated into illuminating, exalting, formative mysteries. In short, the aesthetic moment is a moment of mystic vision.

Understanding of meaning of works of art and thus ability to critize it, however involves the difficult problem of communication. The problem with communication is that it involves two way communication involving sender and receiver. Even a telephone network depends for its use upon one who can speak and one who can hear. Difficulty with enabling the communication with the wide audience is that most of us look in the visual art in highly selective way. The focus of our attention is determined by our past experience as well as present interests. Our brain constantly selects what we want to see and how will we perceive it. This can be described as complex editorial brain activity of the conscious mind which ceaselessly shapes our individual seeing of the exterior world and subsequently determines the experience of the artwork we are confronted with.

To abdicate consciously our own self-determined and self-centristic way of seeing is not easy. But nothing less than a kind of self-abdication is demanded of us by a work of art. It asks us to see it, if for only a few moments, in the terms of the vision that it represents and expresses. Those who go to art galleries and museums confined within the vision of their own making tend to respond to paintings with “I like this one, that one I don’t like” – that is to say, this one accords with and confirms my own private, limited vision, whereas the second one does not. But when we are willing to receive the meaning of the work of art in accordance with the artist’s vision, we experience an exhilarating expansion of understanding. Monumentarily, we see with the artist’s eyes, and feel with his pulsebeat. This moment is a truly creative interval for the beholder which might be considered to be inevitable factor for artwork quality critique.

However how can an audience see and understand the full meaning of an artwork without stripping of its limited vision based on initial visual preconceptions? Is the use of secondary information media the answer how to enlighten the audience about the particular meaning of an artwork and subsequently enable the full empathic submersion into the artwork meaning?

I was first faced with the importance of secondary information by Simon Shama’s Power of Art television series presenting the renowned works of art by enlightening the audience with the facts/knowledge casting new light onto the artworks. This knowledge undoubtedly increased my personal understanding and appreciation of particular works of art and helped me better critically evaluate the quality. The more that is known about art in general and about the particular artwork confronted, the more accessible it becomes to understanding. The informed mind and attentive eye provide the “Open, Sesame” for the vivifying moment when the barriers between our world and the artist’s vision disappear. Knowledge thus helps the process of transmission and reception / interaction between the creators mind and the audiences experience.

Isn’t then perception of visual artwork without the prior secondary information resembling the audience that hears a song by Schubert sung in German – the melodies are fully available, but the full intention of the composer cannot be communicated to those who do not understand German.

Is it then possible, if the artwork experience changes with the change of knowledge, the concept of quality changes as well? Is it possible to change perception of quality from one moment to another by changing the variable of knowledge? Does it mean while the artwork background knowledge is important for creating experience and enabling direct communication between artist and the viewer it is needless during artwork quality evaluations? However in that case it is difficult to evaluate quality because the object is not separate from the experience and quality is inseparable from experience. Is it then prior/subsequent knowledge or rather the emotional invasion caused by artwork which can be considered as determining factor of quality?