Reception noema
Thesis by Sylvia Witt (written in generic feminine).
There are three different ways of receiving an artistic work, the most important distinguishing factor being the closeness to
the artist.
What the artist herself sees in it forms the first level. She is a personal black box, not visible to
the outside world. Everything that artists themselves say about their work is already subject to censorship and is
modified according to the aim and purpose of the statement. In no case is it consistent with the original feelings and thoughts during the planning
and execution of the picture. The first level of the reception of art thus remains unique, individual and monadic.
What people who are very close to the artist think about the work is the second level. They interpret her
own feelings and thoughts with regard to the artist as the person they know. But in turn they always know
only a part of this person, his role on the everyday stage. Facets like "the sister", "the best friend",
"the mother", "the stubborn one", "the longhaired one", "the gentle one" or "the one who likes to laugh a lot". On the second level, the
interpretation is therefore primarily personal, even if a work, for example, may contain a clearly global political statement.
The third level is what all others receive when they see a work and, depending on their previous knowledge, take the statements
of the artist, contemporary events or typical elements of a style or an epoch into account. This level is naturally
the most widespread and most diverse, but unfortunately also the most distant from what the creator actually had in mind.
Interpretations that have gone down in art history as "true" are merely images of their time and of
the always imperfect knowledge that was then spread about the creator. They are winners in the evolution of interpretations that,
such as viewing habits and theoretical paradigms, can certainly change again over the decades.
It's like in the parable "The Blind Men and the Elephant" - individual experiences lead to one's own conclusions,
which can sometimes be completely different from the conclusions of others.
It's easy to denote convenient prejudices, simple explanatory models or the first thing that seems plausible to you as
truth. Reality can only be approached through the effort to illuminate it from as many sides as possible. This
also means being able to plausibly defend your own reception. She is as individual as the artist and her work.
Instead of joining a possibly erroneous majority opinion, one can also allow oneself to defend one's own, well-founded
reception to be seen as equal to others.
In a figurative sense, this attitude can be extended to all living creatures outside of art: Even if biology provides
life in the collective or at least in social interaction, every single living being remains an individual that does not
only exists through the perception of others. So every single living thing is valuable per se. It requires neither
the approval nor the merger, even if both are possible and sometimes necessary.
The three level reception thus always encourages self-thinking and respect for the individual.
As a consequence, the "Secret Works" almost inevitably resulted.
Works that get by without further recipients and stand alone for themselves and the creator. Works, exclusively on the
first level of the reception. Works that don't last and are not photographed, if possible. Without audience.
A spirit of freedom, which was surprisingly recently expressed by John Malkovich as artist Piers in the final scene of the
movie Velvet Buzzsaw. Pensive, a man exhausted by the art business draws himself free by means of
endless ornaments on the beach. Only for himself, and, on the meta-level of course for the audience of the film, so that
there is indeed a picture of the secret work that the film character doesn't know about.
