Art works composed about experience also played a more subtle role in this extension of trust. Within the family intimate communication could be more freely expressed than without. This includes sharing of hopes and frustrations, loves and hates, and the wise lore gathered by the elders about life, its necessities and possibilities. Not all lessons of vital experience are simply expressed through words, even in narratives that verge upon the parable or mythic. Humans eventually developed the impulse to express the inchoate deeply felt subjective musings on one’s experience, akin to what the Japanese call ‘aware’ or the fleeting nature of life symbolized by the cherry blossoms or to ‘yugen’, the experience of profound feelings. These are difficult to express for two reasons. First, these are highly personal and intimate ideas. One may find a way to express them to someone close but to share them beyond the circle of intimacy is a challenge of a different order. Secondly, with the development of art not as an expression by the self about the self but as an expression by the self about one’s experience came a new possibility. The person who made art took on a role different from other pragmatic, practical considerations, and their art work, though based upon personal experience, now conveyed the idea of felt experience in a less personal, more objective way, a way not didactic or organizational or efficacious but, if the artist was both skilled in rendering his ideas in an artistic medium and in composing the art symbol in a culturally competent way, was more a form luminous with being, that luminosity deriving from the internal compositional process interacting with the moment of social and cultural receptivity. (Consider the modern version of what music becomes a ‘hit’ and what becomes a classic). Art then became the way one expressed intimate ideas to a wider audience, and this contributed to the creation of powerful subjectively based landmarks that many took on trust, i.e., the artistic or presentational symbol, in the cultural field.
Returning to the first challenge, the cultural field helped to channel symbolic creativity into traditional forms and thereby to constrain the possibilities of untoward creations. Art in this regard is both a conservative anchor and a dynamic agent of change. The critical feature here, though, is how these cultural forms and art works in particular operate to promote both behavioral and subjective synchronicity. Consider first the early arts of dance and music. Langer called these occurent because they occur in time and then may pass into memory; I would prefer to call them performative, focusing on our active participation in their enactment. Dance and music were and are participatory in inception and nature. Their power or virtue, as it were, come from the behavioral and subjective synchronicity they engender in the participants; this is also the power of ritual, which is partially a derivative of these art forms. Their vitality as art works comes from the participants’ experience of moving forward in time. Indeed, this is their hallmark where past movements or notes guide not just what comes next but what may come next i.e., some developments feel fit or grammatical while others do not feel fit. (I will neglect here the modern attraction to cacophonic or awkward forms.). Dancing and music making, then, when done properly involves ‘feeling the future’. The participants are flowing or moving in time synchronically. They share a moment when time flows from the future into the past—that is their communal experience of virtual, vital time.
As humans developed their symbolic capabilities and our umvelt grew to include so many subjective forms created independently of autonoetic experience, we needed new ways to gain accordance in these culturally shared mental compositions. The evolution of our mental life as it became transformed through our symbolic capabilities posed this challenge: “What was the other one thinking about when they said or did that?”, because our topics became increasingly less about the concrete immediacy and increasingly more about our virtual abstractions displaced from any current time and place. We became distracted by what was going on within and so needed new means for organizing our communal minds without. One key in meeting that challenge was to develop the means for synchronizing our mental processes according to some temporal parameters, whatever they might be. One way language does is this through tense and mood markers. As described above, dancing and music synchronize our somatic experiences moving in time.
As our symbolic abilities developed along imaginal lines, thus embracing what came to be experienced as fantasy, mythic, spiritual, religious or something that I will term the ‘mystic realm within and beyond any one consciousness’, our deep culture then included compositions from/of a shared dream world. Here temporal parameters became elusive yet still necessary if we are all to share in the dream. This may not seem such a challenge to modern minds because we are encultured almost from conception on with stalwart cultural forms that have steadily evolved over 10,000 years and stood explicitly on empirical footing for over 400, and because time for us means well understood natural rhythms and more importantly, what a clock ‘measures’. As Susanne Langer noted, a clock is metaphysically suspect; what we call time by the clock is actually codified passage that we internalize as a gauge for our utilitarian actions. Before the ascendance of large-scale civic governance, science and temporal regulation, however, humans experienced life in a less prescripted manner. The world and time were multi-dimensional and those dimensions varied along cultural lines. Art provided an important way society could organize and regulate individuals’ imaginary creations into a cultural landscape, i.e., we all shared a dream world, and came to provide the means by which such imaginal forms were kept in mind and memory, i.e., art forms reinforced past orthodox compositions, for the current generation and transmission to the next.
Here we come to the other category of artwork described by Langer. The first as described above is the performative; the second she called the plastic because they were constructed of material, e.g., paint, stone, etc. I want to refer to these as ‘artifactual’ because they exist stably in time for anyone’s leisurely examination, in contrast to performative arts that advance and depart without a trace except in memory. The artifactual arts constitute ongoing reminders of experience both individual and cultural; they help keep past compositions alive in the present. Consider the earliest known paintings and sculptures found in caves and dating from around 35,000 years ago. These are representations of powerful animals, e.g., bison, mammoths, etc. and images of humans—the earliest are the silhouettes of hands, rough pictures of humans come a bit later. The artists clearly wanted to keep the experiences with these animals present in the minds of others, whatever any other motives operated for their production, such as spiritual or religious or magical purposes.
As the cultural landscape was filled in, i.e., the shared imaginary forms came to compose an ongoing tradition, these early artifactual artworks, and to some unknown degree performative art as well, began to serve religious purposes and our cultural world became populated with gods and other mystical forces. When oral narratives extended this tradition through myth building, art became increasingly a means to reinforce the understanding of the gods and their stories, to make concrete and immediate what was extant only in the minds of the people, and to anchor these conceptions in the history of the group. This purposiveness, i.e., to keep virtual ideas extant, conserved, and socially/psychologically salient, continued and grew in ancient to modern times. Walk through almost any art or archeological museum or religious building and marvel at how much of the art work before the Renaissance was given over to religious imagery. For the Christian tradition consider how the surfeit of madonna-babe pictures and of crucifixion pictures served to reinforce and extend key narratives that played an important part in the religious milieu consequent events such as the Inquisition and Jewish pogroms as well as holidays such as Christmas and Easter. Other traditions, e.g., Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., have similar art-narrative interactions.
From this perspective, then, the early Paleolithic art laid the groundwork, alongside the utilitarian habitus of tool-making, cooperation, and social regulation, for the cultural growth based upon the shared subjective structures of deep culture. As an aside, the hand silhouettes would seem to be an early manifestation of art as making special, i.e., the subject making art about the self, while the paintings and sculptures of animals would be a manifestation of what we today call the fine arts, i.e., the subject making art about the self’s experience. Again, art, including mythic narrative and drama as well as artifactual artwork, enabled the sharing of material information that would otherwise be lost in time. Art rendered the elusive and ephemeral experiences in accessible form. It continues to do so today, though no longer constrained by religious orthodoxy.
Returning to the two challenges of art, the social regulation of individual’s symbolic fecundity and the extension of trust so that delicate musings could safely be shared beyond one’s intimate circle, we find another feature of art making that is critically important to the modern mind.
Last part coming up next.