BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
- Haydn Dickenson
- Mar 27
- 4 min read
The great pianist Shura Cherkassky, when confronted by that well-meaning but sigh-inducing post-concert green room question “Who is your favourite composer?” would reply “whomever I am playing at that moment”. We all get that question – in my concert-playing days I, too, was often on the receiving end, but I seemed never to be ready with anything approaching Cherkassky's disarming candour and wit.
One of the comparable triggers for an abstract visual artist is “What does it mean?” - or at least it is for this particular visual artist. We've visited this ground before though, in https://www.artfullyabstractedblog.com/post/meaning-what and https://www.artfullyabstractedblog.com/post/agnes-martin-and-the-non-meaning-of-art so we don't need to again today – though by all means have a read of those two articles!
There is nothing new – in this column or elsewhere - in discussing the nature of what makes art, or what makes poetry; or in massaging the Aristotelian notion of a table to encompass one in which we recognise, in a human creation, an art or poetry 'essence'. https://www.artfullyabstractedblog.com/post/making-it-up-as-you-go-along Again, we've been there, done that.
I have been thinking, though, about the nature of what we do as artists and why, and I started pondering, not so much on what 'Art' is, but what the word itself means. Could a close examination of the actual word bring us nearer to an understanding of what we are doing?
“Words, words, words” exclaims Shakespeare's Hamlet when Polonius asks him what he is reading, seemingly dismissing their meaning and importance, but - damn you, Hamlet - I find words to be hugely potent; I love to ponder on their derivation, and am easily sidetracked into doing so.
We need to go back to the early thirteenth century to find the word 'Art' being perceived as “a skill deriving from learning or practice” originating, via Old French from the Latin roots, Artem, meaning 'according to the style' or Ars, a noun denoting a skill or practice – possibly technical and not necessarily one related to self-expression.
What is most unfortunate is that the popular perception of Art has become adulterated by taste and subjectivity. I have encountered too many people content to adopt the lazy stance that is “I don't like it, so it's crap (and by implication, not Art)” or another - “it doesn't look 'like' anything, so it's not Art” or another - “I could have done that”, though in the latter case I'm never sure whether they concede that the object of their derision is Art, or is not.
For centuries, the term 'Art' has been employed to encompass a vast gamut of creative output made to be appreciated for its beauty and emotional power, and those last ten words can open doors to entire realms of magnificence.
Antiquity, unfortunately, has tended to muddy the waters. The ancient cave paintings of Lascaux in France are revered and celebrated as Art while they were in fact created to express religious, ritualistic or symbolic meaning. It is unlikely that they were brought into being with any lofty intent.
Contemporary graffiti, undeniably at variance in original purpose from the Lascaux drawings but made with sociological intent nonetheless, tends to raise eyebrows at least, and provoke vilification at most; unless it is by Banksy of course – because, well, he's an Artist, right? OK.
In the German language, the word 'Art' goes the Latin way, referring to the style or manner in which something is made while, confusingly, the ancient Greek word 'Technê' (the root of our own 'Technology') refers to art or craft. Honestly, it is hard to know where we stand linguistically here, especially as the German word for Art is 'Kunst' which has engendered no similarly employed word in modern English. The roots of 'Kunst' are of Middle High and Middle Low German and Dutch origin, giving seed to the modern German Kennen (to know) and Können (to be able), and thence to 'Cunnan' (Old English) and 'Cunning'. 'Cunning' originally bore no pejorative connotations, and its derivation from 'Cunnan' leads us into reflection on a particularly traduced and abhorred English word which acquired its profanity entirely via the misogyny that, relatively recently, defiled its worthy origins.
Plato has a lot to answer for, defining Art as he did, by the term 'Mimesis', referring to representation, copying or imitation.
Willem de Kooning defied the Platonic stance, stating something along the lines that “There can be nothing more ridiculous than attempting to paint, say, a nose”. René Magritte more loftily opined that “Art evokes the mystery without which the world would not exist”.
De Kooning probably veered towards the wrong side of inclusivity – I prefer to go with Magritte's catch-all poetry; but really, when we attempt to define, through semantics, what Art actually is, maybe we are just talking a load of Ars.
BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Copyright Haydn Dickenson 2025
An interesting delve into the etymology of the word “art.” In my sphere, a whole, new debate rages- What is Craft? What is Art? Can they be the same? Is there a liminal space between them- a sweet spot, if you will?
The labelling of craft, as opposed to art, can be seen in terms of a gendered argument. The former title being used for creative pursuits largely by women, the latter, and more valued term, for activities which men favoured