Monday, 5 March 2012

Art forms

What decides which art forms have mass appeal and which do not? Probably, some work better than others. But it seems to me that there is quite a continuum of possible art forms, only some of which is explored, and with some sweet spots getting all the attention.

What forms of art are unexplored? (And I mean art in a broad sense that includes popular entertainment.) A few ideas:
  • Still life with actors. We have plays; we have statues; we have still lives. One could arrange dramatic scenes, full of dramatic lighting, velvet draperies, and actors in remarkable poses. Admittedly the actors would have to take frequent breaks, or would have to be replaced periodically. Why not?
  • The sense of smell is entirely neglected by art. Granted, it is perhaps the least glamorous of our five senses, but why is it entirely overlooked?
  • Abstract films. Of course there are “abstract” films, but I mean films that are as abstract as abstract paintings. Only animated. Perhaps with weird music. It might not be very pleasant, but why not, if we have so many abstract paintings?
  • Photo stories. Here we have an example of a deservedly niche art form which thrives only in teenage magazines. What is it about them that makes these so awful? Could they perhaps be less awful, if someone talented put their mind to it?
Hmmm. As I think about this, the vast space of possible art forms suddenly seems a lot more limited by what can speak to us humans.