Life and Art
Different people have different views on whether art imitates Life or Life imitates art. We can argue over the matter and not agree since different people would have different views. Therefore we will look at both sides. We will say on the possibilities of art imitating life as well as how life imitates Art (Shiff, 107-122).
Experience is everything that lives, from the smallest organism to the most significant body on the planet. The definition of art has increased to such a remarkable degree over the last several decade’s techniques are no longer just the activities of painting, sculpture, dance, and writing, as it was a short time ago. That some benighted person might venture to say that life is art. It grows and changes every single day.
Oscar Wilde was a flamboyant writer. Just a sound way to make sure his words can stand on their own. Life imitating art is only a sign of the continuation of art. You have to look at the fact that a recorded drama can stand and justify this point. It implies that it must have the test of time as long as it can make up a part of our image in the future. Art imitates life in that our desires and ability to create artificial needs and/or means to satisfy those basic needs seem endless. Therefore, when it comes to the arts, especially art forms that remix the essential human experience, there are way more, almost seemingly endless forms that these can take. Thus, similar to the creation of artificial needs, art forms provide an experience of false reality, which then can axiomatically rein form human perception of reality (Olbermann, Vogel, Oliveira, and Polito, 117-133) These then produces cycles of ironic creation and knowledge, which themselves can become remixed or rearranged into yet, more novel instances of the reality of virtualization and synthesis.
Of all creatures, human beings are the only ones that have the odd capacity to delude themselves as to the nature of reality, via a committed, existential belief in the artifice. It is artifice, therefore, in a profound way to distort the human perception of reality, even at its extreme, to the point of making it impossible to distinguish between the real and the artifice, or being unable to apprehend the truth of the basic fact of being, untouched by artifice or virtualization. On the other side, some people may argue that art requires an art maker and the intention of art. Life is not an art, nor an art imitator, because imitation also requires a plan and much of life is not aware to the degree that it is interested in or capable of even being aware of or interested in art. Art is accomplished by human beings. Human beings are capable of making and having the intention of achieving technique. Through this, we can say that art imitates life. Even non-objective art is occupied with the intellectual or decorative concerns of living human beings, the palettes and patterns that artists use are derived, at some level or another, from life.
As they say, ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder.’ Art is usually a representation of what the beholder finds beautiful. They might then be inspired to imitate what they seen or heard. So, in the beginning, a person who was imitating life has created art. What followed were then people who were inspired by the original life imitator (Rosette, Bennetta, and Njami). Art, therefore, cannot be art if there is no one to appreciate it. This is like the great philosophical question ‘if a tree falls in a forest, and no one is there, does it make a sound?’. This is another question that can’t really be answered.
Conclusion
In conclusion, art was present from the beginning. Therefore I support the fact that life imitates
art. It is through the art that we transfer culture from one generation to another. I, therefore, believe that life imitates art. Art mimics, being on the surface level, Art takes life as its subject. In reality, when intellectuals come up with a new premise, a new way of viewing the world. It is out of reach for the regular citizen. Art plays the role of mediator between the abstract and the emotional. Wild is just highlighting his awareness that perspective is affected much more by feelings, whereas, if left to the scientists, discoveries would affect no real change. In my opinion, this is the actual value of art.
Reference
Jules-Rosette, Bennetta, and Njami Simon. Josephine Baker in Art and Life: The icon and the image. University of Illinois Press, 2007.
Olbermann, Junia Vogel, Livia Pedersen de Oliveira, and Andrea Polito Oltramari. “Does Life Imitate Art or Art Imitate Life? A Look at Unemployment and its Implications in Individual Living from the Perspective of Fiction/A Vida Imita an Arte ou an Arte Imita a Vida? Um, Olhar Para o Desemprego e Suas Implicacoes na Vida do Individuo sob a Perspectiva da Ficcao.” Revista de Ciencias da
Administracao 19.49
(2017): 117-133.
Shiff, Richard.
“Art and life: A metaphoric relationship.” Critical Inquiry 5.1
(1978): 107-122.