Theos-Talk Archives (November 1997 Message tt00179)

K. Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> According to Mark Kusek:
> > Being an artist with this wacky esoteric interest has led me to collect
> > all sorts of these images. I have boxes of them from all over the place.
>
> Well, would you agree that there is a valid distinction between
> good and bad art, and kitsch seems to prevail in some brands of
> "esoteric" art?

Definitely would agree. But I can appreciate the effort nonetheless.
(I happen to love kitschy art) I've seen quite a bit of it, esoteric and
otherwise.
"Good" and "Bad" however are subjective evaluations in my opinion,
even with very erudite critics, societies, etc. and do change over time.

> It seems to me that *some* measure of the
> profundity and value of a spiritual teaching (not necessarily
> its literal truth) is the quality of the art it inspires.
> Anthroposophy and Theosophy come out fine on that score; I AM,
> not so good.

I don't quite agree. "Quality" is a sticky word. Perhaps *some*, if the
person has talent. I believe that our qualitative assessment of a work
of
art has to be made on it's own terms. The majority of art, "esoteric" or
not, is to me, just like most everything else humans create; mediocre.
But I would never stoop to decry anyone the value of the effort. Some of
the
art that I love most is made by children and the unlearned and is more
immediately
expressive of spiritual values than all the holy altarpieces. I'm
greatful for
everyone who's encouraged my own growth as an artist, especially those
when I was
just starting out, fumbling to find my way.

I'm not saying that I think the I AM images are "Great Art". I'm just
willing to look at them for what they are. I actually find a lot of them
and
others of the genre to have a naive charm. An esoteric folk idiom, you
might say.
It wouldn't be the first time. Look at the "alipana" of rural India, for
example.

In fact, if you really know what you're doing, you can say it all with a
single
point scratched in the dirt, or better yet, merely a proper attitude to
the blank canvas.

Regarding the thesophically inclined theorists of early Modernism, who
in my estimation
were ofttimes both talented and inspired, I have, of course, a much
deeper appreciation.

I think of Jesus saying, "Suffer the little children to come unto me."
Only in my mind,
when they do they're showing him the pictures they've made.

> Am just trying to figure out the range of your collecting
> interests and how much of it is tongue-in-cheek and how much
> serious appreciation.

My interests in all of these images is deep and passionate. I am
familiar with many forms, from
many times and diverse peoples. It has been a labor of love for me
and a true vocation/avocation depending on what "mediocrity" I happen to
be creating myself. I am, however, able
to see the humor in it and have grown over the years to be very broad in
my appreciation.

Thanks for asking,
Mark
--------
WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space
http://www.withoutwalls.com