A work of art asks to be judged by a standard which has no meaning for the majority of its spectators.
– David Hare, Obedience, Struggle & Revolt, p. 14
On the same page, David Hare continues, about the film, Sylvia, a biopic on Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes:
An actor is compelled, say, to scratch her ear, on no other grounds but that ‘Oh, Sylvia always scratched her ear…’ Who’s in charge here? The artist or the subject?
But what if the action of scratching the ear had not even this behind it? Would its uselessness qualify it as artistic?
Still the question holds: Who’s in charge? The justification must lie in the performance and therefore with the artist, the actor.
Then, what if the actor, when asked why? merely says, At this point I just thought it would be a good idea if I scratched my ear? Is he or she not the artist? (Kafka would have something to say about this Ear-scratching Artist!)
Leave a Reply