jeff hogue/ bluelab art org

Finish what you've started here
You make your move
just once a year
In the city
in the town
Your happy home
is never found
Second hand
was never planned
The birth was over,
the baby banned
She fled the place
at such a pace
She never even saw your face
So go with me
Inside
Believe
You have so much to give

Switch the light off,
have a go
Force the only one you know
To leave this place
without a trace
A pity
I had seen your face
Where do you think
I will find
This party girl
who was so kind?
Raven hair
and skin so fair
Sadness
never visits there
So go with me
Inside
Believe
You have so much to give

the Delgados
Make Your Move

We didn't sleep too late.
There was a fire in the yard.
All of the tress were in light.
They had no faces to show.
I saw a sign in the sky:
Seven swans,
seven swans,
seven swans.
I heard a voice in my mind:
I will try, I will try, I will try. I will try, I will try, I will try.
We saw the dragon move down.
My father burned into coal.
My mother saw it from far.
She took her purse to the bed.
I saw a sign in the sky:
Seven horns, seven horns, seven horns.
I heard a voice in my mind:
I am Lord, I am Lord, I am Lord.
He said: I am Lord, I am Lord, I am Lord.
He said: I am Lord, I am Lord, I am Lord.
He will take you.
If you run,
He will chase you.
He will take you.
If you run,
He will chase you
'cause He is the Lord.
'Cause He is the Lord...
Seven swans, seven swans, seven swans, seven swans, seven swans...

Sufjan Stevens Seven Swans

“The question is no longer how did we get here, and why? But, where can we possibly go, and how? We live in a society that has drastically narrowed our sensitivity to moral and spiritual issues; the problem we face is how to deal with a belief structure that has blocked both psychological and spiritual development. If there is a new agenda, a new vision now emerging within our society, how might one help put it into practice?”
Suzi Gablik

...bluelab is being developed upon the issue first posed by Einstein, "a problem cannot be solved at the same level of consciousness in which it was created.” It has become evident to many that in order to meet the problems we face as a species we must embrace a radical revision of our beliefs and our behaviors.

bluelab functions upon the strong presumption that artists likely figure significantly into the revisioning of a new world—and the invention of ways to communicate our discoveries. As we all learn more and more about our essential interconnectedness it also becomes increasingly evident that artists can’t function in a social vacuum. The label of “artist” is a problematic one and only used as a signifier of persons with specific media skills and training who are fluent in creative processes and who have some professional link to art. We are working to deconstruct as much as possible the binary--"us vs. them" mentality that still pervades the high art world. It seems to us that consistent with new paradigmatic shifts taking placethroughout all fields--there is a need to reconsider our accepted definitions of "artist" and "audience" all together. bluelab is constructed to offer pathways into higher levels of inclusivity. It is only through true inclusion that we can hope to make work that is deeply inviting and that offers an atmosphere of true love and trust and safety to all.

In terms of the way bluelab will in fact function, we are working to develop a sound and effective approach to community building which relies heavily upon time tested processes that are well understood and are seeking the help of people who are expert in these processes. On practical levels, the sharing and cross fertilization of specific areas of expertise allows for rich and complex works which through communal process are fused unselfconsiously and intuitively making of an organic whole.

Why all the talk of “community”?It is our firm belief that by building works in a heightened communal space we will in fact be building works potent with transformational energies. Jung talked about the distinctions between “liminal”or
transformative space and “liminoid”, or works that are simply entertaining. With a hard look at where we are at as a species and planet—it seems like simple math that we must link art making to the real task at hand—that of saving the earth.

Jesus pushes it back to the edge. Can you even see the image of Christ in the least of the brothers and sisters? He uses that as his only description of the final judgement. Nothing about commandments, nothing about church attendance, nothing about papal infallibility: simply a matter of our ability to see. Can we see Christ in the people, the nobodies who can't play our game of success? They smell. They're a nuisance. They're on welfare. They are a drain on our tax money. If we can, then we are really seeing.

He pushes it even further than that. He says we have to love and recognize the divine image even in our enemies. He teaches what they thought a religious leader could never demand of his followers: love of the enemy. Logically that makes no sense. Soulfully it makes absolute sense, because in terms of the soul, it really is all or nothing. Either we see the divine image in all created things or we don't see it at all. Once we see it, we're trapped. We see it once and the circle keeps moving out. If we still try to exclude some: sick people, blacks, people on welfare, gays (or whomever we've decided to hate), we're not there. We don't understand. If the world is a temple, then our enemies are sacred, too. The ability to respect the outsider is probably the litmus test of true seeing. ...

Everything becomes enchanting...

Richard Rohr Everything Belongs

“[Suzi] Gablik speaks of the previous paradigm of the Enlightenment period and what it has meant to artists: ‘Individualism, freedom and self-expression are the great modernist buzz words.’ The notion that art could serve collective cultural needs rather than a personal quest for self-expression seems almost ‘presumptuous’ in that worldview. Yet this assumption lies at the base of a paradigm shift in art, a shift ‘from objects to relationships.’ Gablik challenges her coworkers not to settle for abstract theorizing in making this paradigm shift. She personalizes and therefore grounds the transformations that must be undergone when she insists that ‘the way to prepare the ground for a new paradigm shift is to make changes in one’s own life.’ Spirituality is about praxis, she is saying, not just theory.”
Matthew Fox, The Reinvention of Work

Is it possible to create new spiritual structures for collaborative art making and to implement such toward community building with a depth of conviction, courage and inspiration that might move participants beyond self-interest toward truly new possibilities? Is it possible that with rigorous and focused processes artists could joyously make work engaging meaningfully with the specter of our global challenges while together exploring the uncharted territory of their souls? Can community building processes readily pour into art making wherein something meaningful and healing might evolve? Is it possible that these discoveries might be transmitted to the public at large through various new media shedding fresh light upon human potentials? Is it possible that all of this could dovetail with the efforts of important organizations such as The Global Justice Movement, Environmental Defense and Amnesty International toward a healthier and happier planet?

We say hopefully, yes.

What if artists were offered stipends, room and board allowing them to come together and to work intensively and without distraction for substantial blocks of time on film, music and real time performance collaborations? What if artists and thinkers could explore important issues in depth leading to transformational theater, installation, film and music? What if these artists were guided by experts through a structured community building process prior to beginning to create their projects? What if artists were given opportunity to work with and interact with some of the leaders of our time in the fields of art, science, and philosophy? What if these artists were given all the production equipment and technical assistance they might need to produce global quality shows? What if supporters and friends of our organization were given intimate amphitheater access to segments of our artists’ processes as well as early rehearsals, scheduled meals, activities and fellowship? What if the productions could be built and performed with some eventually touring the US and the world?

bluelab has been founded and created out of a perceived need to reconsider art making and professional collaborative art practice proceeding boldly from visionary prerogatives. We don’t find fault with the many artists who will not be drawn to what we are doing—for spiritual practice and its interface with collaborative art making are not for everyone.

In light of our present global endgame scenario it seems frivolous at best to argue over rhetorical issues. bluelab is intended for the “Great Work”--that of joining leaders of many fields worldwide who are engaged in the work of saving the earth. We believe that perhaps the only way to meet our present challenges is to deeply transform ourselves which implies the support of a real community and structured spiritual practice to be determined by each member for her or himself.

When serious professional artists are willing to embrace the rigors of authentic spiritual practice, the work of community building and heightened artistic collaboration will undoubtedly fall quickly into place.

The abundance of quotes from Sufi teachers have been included simply because they are part of my daily practice and do not infer a direct link between bluelab and Sufism. In point of fact, any serious spiritual practitioner must see that there can be no schism between the teachings of true Sufism and any sincere humanitarian interest. In the interest of those who may fear some sort of covert Islamic link, Sufism as it’s practiced and defined by and large in the West is Universalist in its orientation and in fact many Sufi’s roots are Christian and Jewish.

"Emptiness feels empty not because there is nothing present, but because whatever it is we're doing has no egotistic interference. The subtle arteries have no ego plaque in them, nothing to resist the smooth flow of the soul. Without our getting in the way, the life of the soul is rich and full, though unpredictable. But it isn't easy to trust strong desire and the life that keeps pouring into us. We always think we know better what should be and how it should all turn out. That is why the death principle --avoiding, worrying, being moralistic--is so popular." Thomas Moore The Soul's Religion

All through Erikson’s work is the implication that the creative adult (the generative adult) is precisely the person who can infuse his life with play;…the great cultural synthesizers—the religious, political and cultural geniuses such as Luther, Freud and Gandhi—were supreme in their playfulness, especially in their work. Their great words of synthesis were personal attempts to restore the active mastery of their egos in the context of the tensions and dichotomies of their personal and public historical situations. All great historical syntheses are as much play as they are work. They are work because they are indeed attentive to the real contradictions and tensions that most people of a given historical period both sense and suffer. They are a result of play because the creative genius does not simply conform to, adjust to, and accommodate to these tensions. Instead, he bends and reshapes these tensions until they submit to a new synthesis which not only enlivens and activates him but which also enlivens and activates a whole people and an entire era.

“Some renaissance theologians worked hard at reconciling paganism with Judaism and Christianity. We have yet to achieve this détente that is essential to the life of the soul. Fragments of our hearts and minds are located in the garden of Gethsemane and in the garden of Epicurus, on the zodiac of the Apostles and on the zodiac of the animals, in the wine of Dionysus and in the wine of the Eucharist, in the psalms of David and in the hymns of Homer.

It is not a matter of belonging to a religion or professing one’s faith, it is a matter of orientation in life and participation in its mysteries.

We can all be pagan in our affirmation of all of life, Christian in our affirmation of communal love, Jewish in our affirmation of the sacredness of family, [Islamic in our affirmation of self-sacrifice,] [Hindu in our affirmation of the multiplicity of God's expression], Buddhist in our affirmation of emptiness, and Taoist in our affirmation of paradox.

The new monk wears invisible robes. Thomas Merton travels across the globe, and in the home of Eastern monks, dies. Isn’t this a myth for our time and about the resurrection of the monastic spirit!”

“Vulnerability, then, is not only the ability to risk being wounded but is most often made manifest by revealing our woundedness: our brokenness, our crippledness, our weaknesses, our failures and inadequacies. I do not think that Jesus walked vulnerably among the outcasts and crippled of the world purely as a sacrificial act. To the contrary, I suspect he did so because he preferred their company. It is only among the overtly imperfect that we can find community and only among the overtly imperfect nations of the world that we can find peace. Our imperfections are among the few things we human beings have in common….Indeed, only honest people can play a healing role in the world.”
M.Scott Peck, M.D., A Different Drum

"In the very first chapter Thomas (Berry) lays before us 'The Great Work.' In each historical epoch, he says, people are given a “Great Work” to do—in one age, the settling of new lands, in another the building of great cathedrals, the creation of artistic, philosophical, religious or scientific works, or the shaping of political structures and ideas. The Great Works of prior periods are seen in such things as the movement of the first people out of Africa in the Paleolithic Period; the creation of language, rituals and social structures in hunter-gatherer communities; the establishment of agriculture communities in the Neolithic Period; the development of the great classical civilizations; and, in the modern period, advances in technology, urban civilization, new
ideals of government and human rights, the modern business enterprise and globalism.

Our Great Work is not something we choose, Thomas says. It is something we find ourselves thrown into by virtue only of being born in a certain time and place. The task may seem
overwhelming, one coming in response to some huge historical difficulty, but, he observes, just as we are given our historical task by some power beyond ourselves, we must also believe we are given the abilities to fulfill this task.
The Great Work into which we and our children are born, Thomas says, comes in response to
the devastation of the planet caused by human activity. We are facing a breakdown in the life
systems that can only be understood by comparison with events that marked the great transitions in the geo-biological eras of Earth’s history, such as the extinction of the dinosaurs and countless other species when the Mesozoic Era ended and our present Cenozoic Era began. Our task is to move from our modern industrial civilization with its devastating impact to that of benign presence. It is an arduous and overwhelming task, one exceeding in its complexity that ever offered to humans, for it is not simply one of adjustment to disturbance of human life patterns, as, for example, that occasioned by the Great Depression or the recent World Wars, but one of dealing with the disruption and termination of the geo-biological system that has governed the functioning of the planet in the 67 million year reign of the Cenozoic Era in the history of the planet Earth."

Ten Sufi Thoughts

from The Way of Illumination by Hazrat Inayat Khan

There are ten principal Sufi thoughts which comprise all the important subjects with which the inner life of man is concerned:
1) There is one God, the Eternal, the Only Being; none else exists save God.
2) There is one Master, the Guiding Spirit of all souls, who constantly leads all followers towards the light.
3) There is one Holy Book, the sacred manuscript of nature, which truly enlightens all readers.
4) There is one Religion, the unswerving progress in the right direction towards the ideal, which fulfils the life's purpose of every soul.
5) There is one Law, the law of Reciprocity, which can be observed by a selfless conscience together with a sense of awakened justice.
6) There is one human Brotherhood, the Brotherhood and Sisterhood which unites the children of earth indiscriminately in the Fatherhood (/Motherhood) of God.
7) There is one Moral Principle, the love which springs forth from self-denial, and blooms in deeds of beneficence.
8) There is one Object of Praise, the beauty which uplifts the heart of its worshipper through all aspects from the seen to the unseen.
9) There is one Truth, the true knowledge of our being within and without which is the essence of all wisdom.
10) There is one Path, the annihilation of the false ego in the real, which raises the mortal to immortality and in which resides all perfection.

The following are shared objectives for bluelab and were first articulated as such by Hazrat Inayat Khan who is credited as the first to bring Sufism to the West--in the early 20th century.

The objectives of the Sufi path:

1) To realize and spread the knowledge of unity, the religion of love and wisdom, so that the bias of faiths and beliefs may of itself fall away, the human heart may overflow with love, and all hatred caused by distinctions and differences may be rooted out.

2) To discover the light and power latent in man, the secret of all religion, the power of mysticism, and the essence of philosophy, without interfering with customs or belief.

3) To help to bring the world's two opposite poles, East and West, closer together by the interchange of thought and ideals that the Universal Brotherhood may form of itself and man may see with man beyond the narrow national and racial boundaries.

Saturday, June 09, 2007

The Nature of Beauty in Contemporary Art by Suzi Gablik A new paradigm of an engaged, participatory and socially relevant art is emerging. If you’re out, you’re out - you simply don’t count," the artist Sandro Chia once declared in an interview in Art in America. Referring to the art world, he said, "Anything that happens must happen within this system," which he went on to describe: "I work for a few months, then I go to a gallery and show the dealer my work. The work is accepted, the dealer makes a selection, then an installation. People come and say you’re good or not so good, then they pay for these paintings and hang them on other walls. They give cocktail parties and we all go to restaurants and meet girls. I think this is the weirdest scene in the world." Sandro Chia’s description of the art world as a suburb of hell is all too familiar; it is a world in which artists are defined through showing or not showing, selling or not selling, and through the goals of money, prestige, and power that are so crucial to our whole society’s notion of success. Within the modernist paradigm under which I grew up, art has been typically understood as a collection of prestigious objects, existing in museums and galleries, disconnected from ordinary life and action. Defined entirely in individualistic terms, the modern artist’s quest was enacted within the inner sanctum of a studio, behind closed doors. This mythology of the lone genius, isolated from society, and relieved of social responsibility, is summed up for me in these comments by the painter Georg Baselitz: "The artist is not responsible to anyone. His social role is asocial; his only responsibility consists in an attitude to the work he does. There is no communication with any public whatsoever... It is the end product which counts, in my case, the picture." Recently, when he was asked on the occasion of his Guggenheim retrospective what role he believes art plays in society, Baselitz replied, "The same role as a good shoe, nothing more." And he has stated elsewhere: "The idea of changing or improving the world is alien to me and seems ludicrous. Society functions, and always has, without the artist. No artist has ever changed anything for better or worse." Many of the beliefs about art that our culture subscribes to, that the problems of art are purely aesthetic and that art will never change the world, are beliefs that have diminished the capacity of artists for constructive thought and action. The critic Arthur C. Danto has referred to this state of affairs as "the disenfranchisement of art", because the hidden constraints of a morally neutral, art-for-art’s sake philosophy is that it has led artists to their marginalized condition in society. I first began to question this mythology myself when I wrote Has Modernism Failed?, and since then, many things have happened to change the situation. The environment is disintegrating, time is running out, and not much is being done. Artistic ResponsibilityMany artists now see their role as sounding the alarm, and have felt the need to alter the direction of their art so that it is more socially and environmentally defined. Such artists incarnate different ideals and a different philosophy of life. Performance artist Guillermo Gómez-Peña states, for example, "Most of the work I’m doing currently comes, I think, from the realization that we’re living in a state of emergency. I feel that more than ever we must step outside the strictly art arena. It is not enough to make art." In a similar vein, Chicago artist Othello Anderson states: "Carbon and other pollutants are emitted into the air in such massive quantities that large areas of forest landscapes are dying from the effects of acid rain. Recognizing this crisis, as an artist I can no longer consider making art that is void of moral consciousness, art that carries no responsibility, art without spiritual content, art that places form above content, or art that denies the state of the very world in which it exists." As many artists shift their work arena from the studio to the more public contexts of political, social, and environmental life, we are all being called, in our understanding of what art is, to move beyond the mode of disinterested contemplation to something that is more participatory and engaged. Such art may not hang on walls; it may not even be found in museums or beautiful objects, but rather in some visible manifestation of what psychologist James Hillman refers to as "the soul’s desperate concerns." For such artists, vision is not defined by the disembodied eye, as we have been trained to believe. Vision is a social practice that is rooted in the whole of being. Breaking with the Paradigm of VisionWriting The Reenchantment of Art represented my own philosophical "break" with the paradigm of vision and the disembodied eye as the axiomatic basis for artistic practice. For instance, I wrote at some length about an art project initiated by a friend of mine in Santa Fe, Dominique Mazeaud, which she calls "The Great Cleansing of the Rio Grande River". For several years, armed with garbage bags donated by the city, Mazeaud and a few friends who sometimes accompanied her, would meet once a month and ritually clean garbage out of the river. Part of the work involves keeping a diary, entitled Riveries, in which she writes about her experiences. Briefly, here are some extracts: November 19 My friend Margret drops me off at Delgado promptly at 9:00 am. Because of the snow I was not sure of the conditions I would find but did not doubt a second that I would put in my day. I find a stone warmed by the morning sun which makes a perfect site for my beginning prayer. Yes, I see what I am doing as a way of praying: Picking up a can/From the river/And then another/on and on/It’s like a devotee/Doing countless rosaries. December 2 Why in all religions is water such a sacred symbol? How much longer is it going to take us to see the trouble of our waters? How many more dead fish floating on the Rhine River? How many kinds of toxic waste dumpings? When are we going to turn our malady of separateness around? March 19 1 can’t get away from you river/In the middle of the night/I feel you on my back/In my throat, in my heart. July 20 Two more huge bags I could hardly carry to the cans. I don’t count any more. I don’t announce my "art for the earth" in the papers either. All alone in the river, I pray and pick up, pick up and pray. Who can I really talk to about what I see?... I have also noticed that I stopped collecting the so-called treasures of the river. It was OK at the beginning, but today I feel it was buying into the present system of art that’s so much object-oriented. Is it because I am saying that what I am doing is art that I need to produce something?Eventually, as the artist’s connection with the river deepens into that of friend and confidante, and even that of teacher, she reaches a point where her relationship with the river becomes even more important than her original ecological incentive to clean it. "For the first time last month," she comments, my meditation directed me to go and be with the river and not do anything. The instructions were clear: "Don’t even take one garbage bag." Her activity had subtly shifted, until it was no longer a systematic retrieving of everything in sight, but has become her own personal dialogue with the river. The river as a living being has something to say. "I have landed in a new landscape," Mazeaud states, "where I discover the river is as true an artist as I am." The hegemony of the eye is very strong in our culture, and to challenge the commitment to its ocular-centric, or vision-centered aesthetic, replacing it with a paradigm shift that displaces vision with the very different influence of listening, is to open oneself up to the complaint that what is being described here is not art at all, but environmental activism, or social work. Many individuals who saw their own ideas reflected in my book’s agenda were enthusiastic and friendly, whereas those who thought that art should be unencumbered by any moral or social purpose were resistant and unfriendly, because it seemed to undermine the way they see their task. When I lectured together with the critic Hilton Kramer a few years ago in Madison, Wisconsin, he proclaimed, with the force of a typhoon, on the podium after my talk, that things with no relation to art were now being legitimized and accepted as art, when, he claimed, art is incapable of solving any problems except aesthetic ones. Kramer is in the forefront of those who believe that when art is actively engaged with the world, its aesthetic quality is necessarily compromised. I, on the other hand, consider that such art is often intensely aesthetic, because in responding compassionately to whatever it touches, it is helping to create a more beautiful world. Artists whose work helps to heal our soulless attitudes toward the physical world have my full respect and attention because, for me, beauty is an activity rather than an entity, a consciousness of, and reverence for, the beauty of the world. Art and the Return of SoulI’d like to conclude with some pertinent comments between myself and Thomas Moore taken from my new book Conversations Before the End of Time. Suzi: As I understand your sense of the soulful life, it would mean bringing art back into a more vernacular, everyday world, and taking it out of the more rarefied sphere of professionalism. You mentioned in the letter you wrote to me that you are very interested in the role of the arts in the world today. Do you see art as being an important vehicle for the return of soul? Moore: Probably its most important vehicle. Suzi: Do you want to elaborate on this? Moore: Yes, there’s so much to say here. First, though, I’d like to pick up on this point of yours about everyday life. There are a number of ways in which we could bring the artist back into everyday life, so that we don’t just have this fringe art world that doesn’t really touch on the values of the way we live, essentially. One way would be for the artist truly to feel a sense of conviviality in the society, in being part of that community, so that there’s a responsibility, and a pleasure, in going into the world and being part of, say, actually designing the city... We can’t suddenly begin living a more artful life, which is the avenue to soul, if in the public life around us, and in everything we see and inhabit, art is invisible. Suzi: And so, in your thinking, that could be a whole new paradigm for a socially relevant kind of art—not precisely in the sense that’s being talked about in the art world now of "political correctness" and social critique, but rather a kind of art that celebrates and participates robustly in the life-world. Moore: Exactly. And here’s another point about soul.., soul enters life through pleasure. It’s an erotic activity: psyche and eros going together, rather than principle and responsibility. Responsibility suggests a kind of outward superego coming in and saying, "You know, this is what you should be doing." That is not a new paradigm; we’re not moving out of the modernistic world then. We’re just feeling we should do something different and more responsible. Suzi: "If we are going to care for the soul," you say in your book, "and if we know that the soul is nurtured by beauty, then we will have to understand beauty more deeply and give it a more relevant place in life. It’s not only pleasure and conviviality, but also beauty that is necessary for the return of soul..." It’s interesting, don’t you think, that archetypal psychologists are the ones who seem to be taking the lead for a renaissance of beauty in our lives, even more than artists or aestheticians? Art in service of humanityIn my new book, Conversations Before the End of Time, James Hillman and I discuss the river project of Dominique Mazeaud in a way that is relevant, I think, to the issues being addressed in my paper. Suzi: The point is, James, that within the traditionally accepted model of the artist, based on isolated individualism, it’s very difficult to perceive any strong connection or direct influence that art could have on the world. That’s why in my writing I have been drawn to artists who are using their creativity in ways that can have a more direct effect. Hillman: We’ve talked about this before, and I think there’s a problem, about, first of all, why that’s art, and second of all, what’s the difference between that artist cleaning the river and l’art pour l’art? Because in the end, her art has no worldly effect. You say yourself that it’s not really even meant to clean the river; it becomes a devotional ritual. (But for me the real problem is) what gets metaphorized in her work? Doesn’t she remain in the literal world? And, as such, it’s not art? She’s literally cleaning the river! Suzi: But that’s a problem only if you want to define art as a separate aesthetic realm, divorced from life and quarantined to the museum or art gallery. And only if you want to insist on the Cartesian split between art and life, self and world. Hillman: I certainly don’t define art that way, but I do believe it transforms the literal to the metaphorical and mythical. Otherwise, the social comment, politics, advocacy, protest exist on one level only... For me, art is dedicated to beauty; it’s a way to let beauty into our world by means of the artist’s gifts and sensibilities... I think beauty needs to come into it somehow. Ideas of beauty and metaphor are necessary to what I call art. Suzi: In another of these conversations, Satish Kumar says that in India, art was never meant to hang on walls—it’s part of life. He thinks that the desert of ugliness all around us is connected with concentrating our notion of beauty in a great body of works of art to be found only in the oases of museums. In India, art is not separated from the normal flow of life. A lot of discussion is being instigated by people now who feel that until—or unless—art can reconnect with life, it’s going to stay marginal, without any part to play in the larger picture. Hillman: That’s a very good point, because it shows something crucial to this civilization: that the work in the river can be put in a different context altogether, which is art in the service of... life. Like the way dance was originally in the service of the tribal community; it wasn’t dance for an audience on a stage. It was a dance that helped the crops to grow. Suzi: In our culture, the notion of art being in service to anything is anathema. Aesthetics doesn’t serve anything but itself and its own ends. I would like that to change. When Hilton Kramer says that the minute you try to make art serve anything, you’re in a fascistic mode—well, I don’t believe that. Hillman: I’d like to defend the cleaning of the river, for a moment. I’m going back to what you said a little earlier: it’s the attempt to put art in the service of something. Suzi: Yes, that’s where the issue is. Hillman: Art in the service of something. If we say that it’s life, and if we think, for instance, of the Balinese village where everything is made to be functional and useful, for celebrations or ceremonies... you’re still in service to the gods, somehow. Now we don’t have that—we’ve wiped the gods out... So the god that art now serves is the god that dominates the culture, which is the god of commodity, of money. So it is in service, it’s in service to gods we don’t approve of... Now suppose the question doesn’t become what art should do, but rather how do we find that which art should serve? Art is already in service, so we could perhaps change that to which it is in service? Suzi: So the question is what could art better serve than the things it has been serving, like bourgeois capitalism, throughout our lifetimes? Hillman: Right! And I think the artist in the river is serving a different god. Suzi Gablik is an artist, writer and teacher whose books include Has Modernism Failed?, The Re-enchantment of Art and Conversations Before the End of Time. This article is from a symposium on The Nature of Beauty in Contemporary Art sponsored by the New York Open Center and the International Society for Consciousness in the Arts in October 1995.