Is ekphrasis an art form? Most artists would have to agree that ekphrasis, which is described as “a literary description of or commentary on a visual work of art” in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is in fact an artistic practice. However, I have been presented with what I believe is a form of ekphrasis that isn’t simply a description or commentary on some other great work of art. Ekphrasis is much more than an artistic way to speak of superior artworks. I strongly believe that it is a form of art that stands on its own; something powerful enough to merit its own descriptions and rhetoric. In this essay, I will give my reasons for believing in ekphrasis as a valuable contribution to art and culture in today’s age, as well as the example that led me to become so passionate about word art. I will show how ekphrasis has stirred mixed emotions to date, and how it remains the practice of forming rhetoric about other art without reducing its actual value in culture and creative arts in the 21st century.
First off, what is ekphrasis? As previously mentioned, ekphrasis is widely known as the practice of forming a poem or commentary of some sort pertaining to another artwork. Examples of famous ekphrasis works would be The Shield of Achilles by W. H. Auden, The Painting by Jon Balaban, Landscape with the Fall of Icarus by William Carlos Williams and so many others. Ekphrasis is useful in bringing the interpretations of artwork to a whole new level. However, ekphrasis is much more than that. “Webb insists that ekphrasis be considered in terms of effect rather than subject matter: it is "a speech that brings the subject matter vividly before the eyes"” (Jarratt). Ruth Webb wrote a book about ekphrasis, and here, Susan Jarratt explains how Webb sees it as more than just commentary. It requires thought and provocation, in much the way that the subject artworks themselves did. We cannot just simplify ekphrasis and say that it enhances the meaning of art. In fact, Webb speaks of how ekphrasis runs deeper than just paintings and sculptures. Jarratt writes about Webb’s observations on how “vivid impression could be achieved through the detailed description, or narration, of many subjects, including activities such as battles, storms, plagues, earthquakes, and festivals, not only through descriptions of objects such as paintings, sculptures, and architectural wonders” (Jarrat). We maintain here that ekphrasis is still and will always be art based on art. However, what art doesn’t have artistic roots? The philosophical questions in aesthetics have always been complex; however no one can deny that beauty and art are almost always hand in hand. If this is true, then seeing as most art stems from beauty, and beauty is paired with art in the first place, art is always about art. Why would ekphrasis be any different? The point here is that ekphrasis can be taken to a whole new level. On its own, it could be a dominating art form of the 21st century. “Webb explains that ekphrasis points to "the complexities of a phenomenon which goes beyond the normal functions of language"” (Jarratt). If we simply regard ekphrasis as language meant to enhance art, we are missing the point. Ekphrasis has the potential to bring aesthetic meaning to elements in our lives that often go unnoticed or even misunderstood. "The connection between ekphrasis and the idea of visual representation ... runs deep"(Webb).
So, what is the further application of ekphrasis in the 21st century? Not long ago, I was presented with the work of Stephen Vitiello through the Soundwaves exhibition at The Museum of Contemporary Art in San Diego. Vitiello composed a book called Sounds Found. I say “composed” because the point of his book was to illustrate sound in a synesthetic kind of way; however his medium was Word Art. Chris Burnett reviews a Miami Word Art show in a scholarly article and observes that “the show itself works wonderfully in broadening the focus on avant-garde history to an open-ended resource for future discoveries offered by visual poetics” (Burnett). Word Art is an emerging art form where words are used in a visual, often multi-media fashion to portray modern issues, passions and phenomena in an abstract and yet obvious way to audiences. What Vitiello did was he collected newspaper clippings of words that visually made tangible sounds in his mind. Then, he put them all together in a book. This concept captivated me because I instantly recognized how what Vitiello did could be considered as ekphrasis. I knew it was a long shot to try and convince anyone of my belief; however it could potentially revolutionize ekphrational practices. Words in themselves are works of art. The union of letters, syllables, sounds, consonants, vowels and pronunciations all working together to form beautiful mechanisms of expression, each unique to the person using it: how much more artistic can anything be? And what Stephen Vitiello was doing, was creating his own artwork, based on this verbal art. He also encompassed sound art with his visual representation of noise. When looking at Vitiello’s work, the clippings he chose are indeed very stimulating. Some are loud and obnoxious, others quiet and peaceful. By cutting out just words and phrases, he eliminated all contexts, and amplified the sound present in this presentation. Isn’t that a method in “regular” ekphrasis? Some of the ekphraseis writings completely eradicate previous context of artworks and create a whole new dimension to seemingly clear-cut art. To me, Vitiello’s project showed how ekphrasis is more than a simple, cookie-cutter description or commentary of another work of art. Sounds Found shows how ekphrasis can be its own art form. Why not break the boundaries of simplicity?
In conclusion, it is very difficult to attempt to explain why something is more complex after it is made out to look simple. As humans we strive for simplicity amidst a complex existence. However, ekphrasis is not one of those things that require simplification. Ekphrasis is something complex, like the formation of any other artwork, and it deserves proper recognition. We truly must embrace the potential for artwork to grow and branch out. Stephen Vitiello managed to combine Word Art, Sound Art and ekphrasis into one symphony of meaningful art. Why are we going to try and ignore the roots of his work because the set definition of ekphrasis is “a literary description of or commentary on a visual work of art” (Merriam-Webster)? Can we be open to the concept of ekphrasis being as much an art form as painting, sculpting, dancing, acting or composing? I truly think that Vitiello calls us to re-evaluate the definition of art, and the boundaries that have been set by how we define it.
Burnett, Chris. "Visual Poetics: Art and the Word." Afterimage 31.2 (2003): 8-. ProQuest Research
Library. Web. 9 Nov. 2011.
Jarratt, Susan. "Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Practice."
Rhetorica 29.1 (2011): 113,115,119. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 9 Nov. 2011.
"Culture” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2011.
Web. 9 Nov. 2011
"Art” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2011.
Web. 9 Nov. 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment