Introduction
Maurice Merleau-Ponty begins his essay “Eye and Mind” with a comment on science. Studying the world in the manner that science does, takes a person out of one’s body, he says. It places the world in a series of definitions, constructs, indices and variables, allowing only the understanding of minute, exact changes to have a status of legitimacy. He says science “comes face to face with the real world only at rare intervals” (Ponty, 121). For any lover of art who lives in this practical, rational capitalistic society, this point of view is refreshing. Today, typically, the real world is referred to only in regard to the practical and, arguably, pessimistic points of view that leave no room for imagination, joy, celebration, and play—all essential parts of living that must not be forgotten. The world, if viewed through the eyes of science is looked at for its operational significance. It is only in this practical side that the world must be viewed—everything must be quantifiable and definable. The problem arises in the fact that not everything is. Ponty, the French philosopher, wrote this essay in an attempt to understand the nature of the world around him and understand the meaning behind the human experience. Just as is true today, the world around him lauded the benefits of science to the detriment of belief in or appreciation of that which moves the spirit. While, certainly, scientific study and discovery has helped the world into the form it is today, allowing people to live longer healthier lives, meaning can come only from the brain’s ability to imagine, dream, and play. Meaning is found in art. “Now art, especially painting, draws upon this fabric of brute meaning which operationalism would prefer to ignore” (Ponty, 123). The creative has the power to show life’s meaning, even if the writer does show his bias for poetry. While this writer has experienced bouts of the indescribable in the subtext of the acting in an excellent film, the energy moving a haunting melody, or a well written line of verse, one cannot fault Ponty for knowing his preference. His point stands firm--art is powerful. In order to explore this power, this writer intends to look at one of the world’s greatest, most recognizable painters of all time. He is a man who no one knew until his death but, now, he will never be forgotten—Vincent Van Gogh. Even now, after having seen his work possibly thousands of times, once cannot help but stare into his eyes in his self portrait, the disproportionate painting of the room he inhabited, or the swirling masses of stars in the sky of “Starry Night.” In Van Gogh’s work, Ponty, and any other viewer is sure to be struck by the conceptless form that beauty takes, and the lack of operational purpose one finds in art that exists in sharp contrast to its ability to touch the human soul.
The Process of Artistic Transfixion: An Operational Definition
It happens like this-- unexpectedly. A person can pass by dozens, hundreds, millions of paintings and, possibly, react favorably or unfavorably, but not experience any real transcendence from the world. Every once in a while, however, while strolling through a gallery or an artistic neighborhood, one encounters a piece that makes one feel as if lightning has struck the body. The feet feel heavier and nailed to the floor. The arms fall limp to the sides as the body relaxes into itself. Every bit of tension one has drops away as once becomes taken away into a trance, staring at one, definite point, unable to move. That point is, assuredly, a work of art. Now, the scientist may see this transfixed, transcended and transformed person and think to himself or herself, “No. I’ll show those silly artists. Science can understand meaning.” The scientist then grabs gadgets and gizmos aplenty, whosits and whatsits galore. He approaches the man or woman transfixed and asks, “Excuse me sir or madame, may I affix these whatsits to watch your brain chemistry here.” Half listening, the sir or madame say, “sure.” This person’s mind is somewhere else, after all—off on a romp into the imagination. Finding some real connection to an understanding that feels special, somehow, though hard to articulate and elusive of any real grasp.
The scientist applies the gizmos, attaches them to the whosits and goes about his or her business, taking notes, counting, watching brain activity dance in colors across a screen, seeing and interpreting that the brain is moving and working, but missing the brilliance of the natural patterns of this moving and working—missing the art that the brain is giving back to the painting. Finally, the transfixed person decided to leave. He or she walks away having had a moving, heartfelt experience. The scientists walk away with graphs, charts and images of another nature, no closer to meaning than he or she was when the process began.
This vignette reflects the gap between the practical world and the creative world. While the person looking at the painting may have no concept of how his or her brain works, the power of the artwork is palpable. The scientist sees and understands that a connection exists between person and painting. Much goes on within this person’s head, but nothing is moved within the person’s heart. This raises the question of the purpose of art. It is not designed to create rational understanding. It is designed to communicate, to inspire, to serve to aid in catharsis, to explode, and jump for joy. Art is designed to impact for the sake of impact itself. It has a purpose, but this purpose exists with a lack of purposiveness. In other words, the purpose is not pointed. This last statement is not true of all visual art. Ponty claims that painting is innocent in its quest to create meaning (Ponty, 123). However, one must simply look to the work of street artists like Banksy who use paint and other visual art supplies to create stunning, soul moving work that has a pointed, satirical purpose. Innocence is not, as Ponty suggests, a key concept in understanding the significance art has in communicating to the onlooker. Life’s meaning does not have to be found in a state of innocence. It simply has to be touched upon. Meaning and beauty are not experiences that can be articulated. They are felt.
A Picture of Van Gogh
Ponty hits the nail on the head when he suggests that a masterful painting can invoke an otherworldly experience. Van Gogh’s work is no exception to this rule. The two self-portraits above are examples of the ability images have to haunt one’s mind. These images are so effective because they are the work of a masterful and brilliant artist. From the colors, to Van Gogh’s expression, one is able to experience the emotion behind the eyes of the artist as he stares out from the canvas. The effect is both intense and calming. It takes the viewer out of his or her body. The same can be said of the painting “Starry Night.” This may be one of Van Gogh’s best known works. The tone of this piece is much brighter than that of the series of self-portraits, which seem to be intended to serve as a form of self-exploration. Instead, “Starry Night” seems to be a celebratory piece, taking the beauty of the night sky and enhancing it. Making the stars and the whirling movement of the wind and the skies larger than life so that they may be enjoyed in a new way. The effect is magical. One feels the cool, glowing moon is protecting the small, sleepy town in the picture. One can almost hear the cypresses rustle as the wind swirls through the air. The unrealistic nature of the painting adds to this effect, opening up the imagination to creating a fantasy world within the image. The painting never grows tiresome. It is a masterpiece and makes one understand Ponty’s love of painting and insistence in its power over one’s understanding of human existence.
In general, though, Ponty’s assessment is short sighted. The philosopher is convinced that it is of the utmost importance that one feels connection with the real world—the sense of meaning and of beauty—only when a state of innocence is present. He seems to lack faith in the intention of the artist. “Only the painter is entitled to look at everything without being obliged to appraise what he sees. For the painter, we might say, the watchwords of knowledge and action lose their meaning and force” (Ponty, 123). However, the works of Van Gogh seem to be in direct conflict with this idea of innocence. The self portrait shown above is one of many in a series of these works. Van Gogh is classified as a post-impressionist. His work and the work of the other painters in this movement are marked by a lack of realism in the image. Rather than painting an exact replica of one’s face or a vase full of flowers, the shape, color, and perspective were altered to reflect the point of view of the artist. As such, the work is not innocent. The paintings are decidedly an appraisal of what the artist is seeing. The interpretation is expressed through unusual and unnatural lines and colors, rather than words. This communication style may not be as clear to its audience as the use of language, but it exists. The intention behind the paintings above seems to be self-exploration. Vincent Van Gogh is famous for his “artistic temperament” as much as he is his paintings. This temperament manifested in his removal of his own ear—and act that would easily be construed as a symptom of a potentially severe mental illness today. The two paintings above show Van Gogh at two different points in time. The first when he had his ear and the second after its amputation. The painting on the left is gloomy, using dark colors Van Gogh is portrayed with a look of sadness in his eye. It is almost as though he were trying to capture and understand the working of his mind and his emotion. The painting leaves the viewer with the sense that living inside his head is not always an easy task.
The second painting portrays Van Gogh as he is recovering from his self performed surgery, a fact demonstrated by the large bandage wrapped around the artist’s head. The two almost look like different people. The first was painted in 1887 and the second, bandaged image was painted in 1889. Van Gogh’s visage in the second image has a lighter mood. The sense of melancholy behind the eyes has vanished and been replaced by an inquisitive, innocent quality mixed with some unnamable, off putting energy. The colors have this same dichotomy. On one hand, they are brighter and carry a feeling of freedom, but they are also sickly. Everything, including the artist’s skin is tinged with a green hue. This makes the artist appear a little sickly. It gives the sense that something is off.
While both of these works reflect a lack of innocence as Ponty described it, they are both arresting pieces. They both draw the eye of the viewer in and keep them looking. These works of art possess the power that Ponty is searching to find in the essay. They carry with them a deeper feeling and understanding regarding the nature of the world. It is possible that the indescribable quality that Ponty is looking to find in art is coming from some other source in the artist aside from innocence.
Visions of Sugarplums
Ponty goes on to offer more evidence regarding painting’s superior ability to touch upon conceptless beauty that induces wonder in the viewer of a painting. Ponty cites people’s behavior in times of revolution. Painters are not jailed for their revolutionary behavior. In fact, attempts are made to hide and keep the art. This is meant to show its value in innocence and its power over other art forms. However, Ponty’s point of reference is, again, limited. Art can certainly be used in aiding and inciting revolution and has a long history of doing so. The propaganda posters of World War II are excellent examples. These images were designed pointedly to spread distinct messages to those who saw them. They were used to encourage people in the United States and the United Kingdom to do their part to aid in the war effort. They were used in countries like Germany and Italy to spread the messages regarding race and international relations that the countries’ respective governments wanted their citizen to believe. The styles of these works of art are arresting. The colors, shapes, and tone are akin to Van Gogh’s painting of the sunflowers on the table. The difference is that these posters are overt in their message while Van Gogh’s work is more subtle. The work of the street artist Banksy is another strong example of art that is both as effective as Ponty recounts but that does not fall into his framework of what makes an effective artist. Banksy is famous for producing works that challenge the viewer to think in a different way and comment directly on society. His images are simple, recognizable, and treasured by many, just as Ponty would suggest, but they are definitely not devoid of public commentary. Ponty is making a large assumption in saying this is true of any artist. It is possible that Van Gogh’s painting of his bedroom is a commentary on the challenges he faced living his life with mental illness. The shape the room takes under his eye is skewed. It almost feels as if the room is tipped and its entire contents are about to fall onto the viewer. It is possible that this painting was meant to express this feeling. In 1885 or 1886, Van Gogh created a painting that portrayed a skeleton smoking a cigarette. It differed greatly from his other work in that the subject was not realistic. He was not painting something he saw, but an image he created in his mind. This departure clarifies the tone of his work. It could easily be used as part of an anti smoking campaign today. While it is unlikely that the artist was commenting on the dangers of smoking cigarettes, it does speak to some larger message, however unclear, a message that could have been a conscious part of the artist’s creative process. Again, however, even with this extensive dissection, all of the works mentioned continue to impact the viewer. One cannot help but stare at the images of the sunflowers sitting in a vase. The room, even as it feels tilted and skewed offers the viewers both the idea of a sense of desire for a respite as well as an accurate conveyance of the feeling that the world may be closing in or collapsing. All of this happens, as with Banksy and the war propaganda of World War Two, with or without a sense of innocence. Intention is not an enemy of the artist. It does not prevent the creation of meaningful work nor does it translate to work that has no impact on its viewer. The otherworldly quality that is the essence of a powerful painting comes from some other, indefinable source. An artist can still be effective if he or she desires to have an impact. Ponty’s narrow vision in this regard could be traced to the elusiveness of the quality that he is attempting to understand. Viewing a masterful work of art takes on an almost spiritual quality. Purity or presence may be a more accurate description of the quality that creates impactful art. If the art form could be boiled down easily, it would have happened long ago. Ponty makes valid and meaningful points about the power the artist has in society.
Vision Above All Else
Ponty, true to his form, goes on the cite vision as the ultimate of the human senses. Vision, he insists, is responsible for any transcendent artistic experience. He supports this idea with the fact that movement comes based on one’s vision. However, this is not entirely true. Hearing also plays a role in moving through space, as does the tactile sense. If a person is moving through space and steps on something sharp or trips over a crack in the sidewalk, it is the sense of touch that saves in this instance. Again, one must contend that music has equal power to touch on the meaning of the world and to create beauty as painting. The intricacies of the works of Mozart or Beethoven have been shown to increase brain activity and to foster cognitive development in children. The tunes of Clare de Lune or Beethoven’s 5th Symphony are, arguably, just as recognizable as Van Gogh’s “Starry Night.” Vision is an important part of human functioning and one can have an otherworldly experience of beauty with this sense. However, many would argue, in listening to the work of musical masters such as Beethoven and Mozart, that music has the same ability. In ancient Greece, prisoners were taken out of prison once a year to attend the city’s theatre festival because the leader of the city states believed that theatre could help in rehabilitating the criminals. They believed the art form held a redemptive power. The power of touch must also not be forgotten. Though massage or sex may not be considered an art form, experiencing masterful versions of either can change one’s life.
In making this claim about vision’s superiority, Ponty is over simplifying the issue in order to find the answer he is looking for. His major question lies in an attempt to find a connection to the real world. This world is marked by its ability to make a person think, feel, and experience life in a new, more profound way. This profundity is marked by the trance like state demonstrated the vignette provided earlier. Religious mystics and Buddhist monks strive for a similar experience while in meditation. The answer Ponty is looking for goes far deeper than vision and is connected to a much broader part of existence than painters.
Conclusion
As a whole, Ponty’s essay “Eye and Mind” provide its reader with excellent fodder for consideration. There is more to life than meets the eye. Attempting to understand the world based on rationale alone is bound to leave one empty and devoid of life’s true meat—emotion and experience. In comparing his ideas to the work of the master artist Vincent Van Gogh, one almost believes Ponty’s theory that painting is the ultimate form of expression and has greater capabilities in getting people to the heart of the meaning behind the human experience. Van Gogh’s work is honest, beautiful, whimsical, heartbreaking, daunting, and haunting. The artist has managed to capture some of life’s essence in his oil paints to share with the rest of the world. It is at this point that one begins to recognize the shortcomings of Ponty’s arguments. First, he believes that these impactful artists are not interpreting their world, when evidence would suggest otherwise. He discounts other powerful forms of art and experience, such as music, storytelling, and touch, all of which share the power the visual arts have to shift one’s perspective of the world. He then applies the same narrow perspective to the importance of the five senses, naming vision as the leader in the pack, when they are more likely to be equal. Despite all this, the work offers interesting fodder for inquisitive minds and some valid points worth considering.
Works Cited
Gogh, Vincent Van, and Johannes Van Der Wolk. Vincent Van Gogh. New York: Rizzoli, 1990. Print.
Ponty, Maurice, and Galen A. Johnson. The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader: Philosophy and Painting. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern UP, 1993. Print.
