Over the past couple of years, I have given considerable thought as to what the world, specifically, human culture,  would be like if there were no artists, if there was no art. Or perhaps more to the point, where exactly does the artist find him/herself placed on THE LIST OF VITALLY IMPORTANT PEOPLE?

Exactly what initiated such ruminations within me is not altogether clear; perhaps it was simply my endless love and passion and even, at times, awe of the creative imagination and visionary splendor  that we humans are fortunate enough to possess --- that mysterious quality that puts us so far beyond the capabilities of the millions of other species with which we share  our homeworld; or it may have been my becoming aware of the tragic and frankly outrageous degree of funding cuts for the arts in our educational institutions that our government has deemed necessary in order to prolong its own agenda of (mostly) senseless foreign conflicts and domestic political posturing (geez....don't get me started....  I myself have been directly affected by these spending cuts in my profession)--- perhaps that is what accounts for these ramblings. Whatever their origin, these thoughts have been rattling about my skull for no small amount of time and I've at last decided to share them with any who care to comment in hope of  finding fresh perspective. To that end, and knowing full well the potential critique to which I open myself, I offer for your consideration and amusement the following speculations.

Now, before continuing, a clarification  is in order to define exactly what I mean by "art". Therefore let it be understood that the term "art" encompasses a wide variety of genres, including drawing, painting, dance, literature, culinary skills, design, sculpture, film, woodworking, etc.etc. I would thus define the artist as any person who is motivated to deliberately CREATE something for the sole purpose of stimulating the senses of other people. (...those senses being taste, sight, sound, smell, and touch). Stimulating, I should add, not always in a pleasing manner; that is, some art may have the expressed purpose of shocking or offending the viewer. This definition is hardly all-encompassing, but it will do for the purpose of this essay.

So, with those parameters agreed upon, let us consider this premise....

Assuming the role of Devil's Advocate, I would argue that in the most LITERAL sense, ART is completely unnecessary for the continuation of mankind. Esthetics are irrelevant; what humans REQUIRE FOR SURVIVAL  are food and shelter and medicine. The food is not REQUIRED to taste good---it only need be nutritious;  the shelter is not REQUIRED to be luxurious, it only need be a barrier from inclement weather. A ballet will not keep you from starving.  A porcelain sculpture will not  shelter you from a typhoon.  Perhaps the practical irrelevance of ART can best be illustrated by  giving serious consideration to this question: With whom would you rather be shipwrecked ---a Master carpenter with his toolbox or a poet possessing a pen and a ream of paper?

Following  this line of thinking, it seems to me that the world is very much divided into four BASIC types of humans:

1) The builders and  mechanics---those people who construct and repair. They build and operate  the buildings,the machines,  the highways, the waste disposal and electrical systems,  the vehicles. They are ESSENTIAL to the continuation of civilization and society.

2) The executives---office workers, politicians, health providers, law enforcement, judicial workers, those folks whose environment consist of offices, desks, conference rooms, medical facilities and filing cabinets. They handle the business, make and are responsible for the enforcement of laws,  and manage the  paperwork and clerical documentation of society. They are ESSENTIAL to the orderly function of civilization and society.

3) The food providers---the farmers and ranchers, and the people who are in the business of distributing the food that is produced. Of course, they are ESSENTIAL to the continuation of human society.

*...and the fourth group, the artists---those whose  sole purpose is to please the senses...the painters, chefs, writers, composers, musicians, dancers, designers, film makers,  etc.  They are ESSEN-----wait a minute....are they really?

It seems to me that, given a little bit of consideration,  it becomes clear which one of these four groups of people is truly---literally--- expendable in regard to the practical ongoing propagation of civilization.  

So, let us do away with that unnecessary fourth group and consider the consequences.  Let us  imagine a world, a society, a civilization without art; a world of pure practicality and function, where buildings are boxes, windows are all square, food is nutritious but bland, "fashion" is nonexistent---clothing has no style or individuality from person to person, music and pictures and plays are unnecessary and therefore also nonexistent---this is a world of nothing more than a smooth-running comfortable civilization. There would be nothing to look at, nothing to listen to, nothing to initiate fits of uncontrollable laughter, or whimsy or heartbreak or outrage. There would be nothing to PLEASE OUR SENSES. No books with stories, no concertos, no fountains, no architecture, ......all because none of these things is LITERALLY NECESSARY for the establishment of...... a smooth-running, functional society........

........would we not be a society of numb, soul-less,  joyless, miserable people? Would we not be a colony of ants, simply going about the business of building our simple anthill, eating when necessary, serving the requirements of the Queen (government), a society of pure joyless function and propagation?

...and that, I argue,  is why we---the world--- need the artists. It is the aromas and the music and the literature and the artwork and the tastes of the world that make life so pleasurable and joyful and fascinating. It is the stories, movies, dances, and symphonies that make a person glad to be alive, that make this troubled world tolerable and give us hope. That the government funding of the arts should be reduced in any way is,  to me, is an abomination! Making the children of the world aware of the magic and pleasure of the various arts ---dancing, cooking, drawing and painting, photography, etc.----is just as crucial  to their education as teaching them the important skills of readin, 'ritein' and 'rithmatic. The importance of ART in culture can not be overstated because without ART  there IS no culture.

Art is the reason why buildings are not boxes, why food is delicious, why music can compel us to shed tears or bang our heads like idiots. It is our medium for paying tribute, for showing appreciation, for giving thanks.  It is why we are able to visit other galaxies in our minds, or appreciate an intricately designed Grandfather Clock. It compels our imaginations to soar and our hearts to beat more quickly. ART, in the end,  is ABSOLUTELY necessary---in fact, VITAL--- for the continuation of the human race.

......and that is why I believe the "artist" to be separate from other people. That is why I believe artists to be ----not better----but uniquely special, a different type of human who sees the world through "artist's eyes". That creative urge with which the artist in indwelt  is far far removed from the thing that motivates another  person to become a politician or  businessman or athlete or construction worker.  It is that unique compulsion within that urges us, unlike so many others,  not only to marvel at that beautiful sunset, but to  CAPTURE IT!  On canvas. In words. On film. In music.
The artist embraces  the world in a completely differently manner than others. The din of midday traffic is music to the musician, but not to the cab driver.  A cluster of birds sitting on a telephone line become musical notes to a musician, but  not to a plumber.
   The composer Vivaldi  painted his portraits of the four seasons---summer, winter, spring and autumn--- with, of all things,  an orchestra!  Musical representations of CLIMATE!! Only an artist could conceive of such a thing!



My final thought is this: I LOVE lampposts, those glow-topped columns that line the city streets around the world, each with it's own unique regional appearance and design.  And if you really think about it, the basic purpose of a lamppost is to accomplish little more than the illumination of a section of  street. That is all it is LITERALLY required to do. To that end,  what is needed is a sturdy base, a pole, and a lamp. And sure enough, that is exactly the type of lampposts that just happen to line Selief Lane here in Kodiak, as well as my neighborhood of Mozart Circle; they consist of  a base, a pole, another pole extending out over the street, and a lamp. An example of pure function, they are ugly and dreary and soul-less. Contrast those with the lampposts that line the streets of New York or Chicago or practically ANY other city. THOSE lamps are beautiful, with intricate scrolls and columns and wonderfully designed bulb housings. Even the lamps that line the downtown Kodiak shopping area are nicely designed pieces of art that nobody seems to notice except people like me. And the point is, they don't HAVE to have any design at all to perform their function---they COULD be plain and uninteresting and drab....but they're NOT. They are there to please the senses, they are nice to look at, and they make idiots like me smile at my good fortune for not  being born a snail, but rather  for being human and able to appreciate the beautiful design that somebody drew for that lamppost. I heartily encourage you to Google Image "Streetlights" or "Lampposts" and revel in the perfect marriage of art and function. Of course there are endless examples of this to be found in architecture; I just think that lampposts are one of Artistic Mankind's finest moments.

Thanks for "listening".  RSVP's are encouraged and welcome.

---Ric Chamberlin