Creative Intuition

But I then showed him some of my works, lettinghim know first that I am a complete amateur. Ishowed him a painting I did for a friend of mine,a painting of his house in winter. I enjoy lookingat that painting every time I see it, because itbrings me back to the many times I’d visit him inthe winter. I’d observe the night lightilluminating the front porch, with the window ofthe lounge next to it, and all the feelings(emotions) that I’ve associated with thosediscussions that took place as well as thefriendship celebrated in that lounge over theyears came back to me. But the owner of thegallery remarked: “Why would I want somethinglike that? It means nothing to me. It meanssomething to you, but not to me.” And there’s asense in which he is right. The work is not wideenough to appeal to a large number of people. To him, it was a painting of a house in winter.A great artist would be able to create a work of beauty that communicates a more universal experience. A Trisha Romance,although highly sentimental, would appeal to more people, since it contains elements that widen it. Perhaps its sentimentalityis the reason we’d argue that Trisha Romance art is not great art. Technically it is excellent, it brings you into the picture,into the town of Niagara on the Lake, for example, but does it liftyou “above the earth”? It is pretty, but is it awe inspiringlybeautiful?Now, it is true that different people will bring different mental andemotional horizons to the work, and so there will be various degreesof appreciation, but a good work of art opens up a world to theviewer, and truly great art lifts a person up towards the source of allthat is beautiful, the Supremely Beautiful. A great artist or writerwill be able to draw the viewer or reader into that world more sothan an amateur, but that world which exists in his creative intuitionis something more than this world. The experience is delightful,because it is beautiful. Great art, however, is more than delightful;it is awe-inspiring.Is there truth there? I would argue that yes, indeed, there is a kind of truth in a great work of art. There is the experience of areal world, a real culture that I (the viewer) am in contact with. Now truth and beauty are properties of being. A great artistwill be able to communicate “the fullness of what is” through his art, certainly not “fully” or completely, but in a way that acamera or straight history (if we are talking about poetry or literature) is unable to do. There is often more to what we knowthan can be expressed scientifically, or through straight historical narrative. There is humor in certain characters that cannotbe adequately reproduced, except through the talent of a great novelist. The truth expressed need not be a moral truth,namely, what “ought to be”, but may simply be limited to “what is”. The more complete that expression, the more pleasingthe work.I remember reading a novel by Norman Mailer, The Executioner’s Song, which depicts the events leading up to and includingthe execution of Gary Gilmore. Mailer was able to draw me into that world with such skill that I couldn’t wait for the novelto be done with, because I found Gilmore’s world so depraved. But it was a very accurate portrayal, one far more true to thefacts than say the television series Criminal Minds. Now, I’d never tasted that world before, so there’s a sense in which allknowledge is not reminiscence. A work can “put knowledge into me”. I have not been to Tuscany, but I have enjoyed thepaintings of Slava Brodinsky. I often wonder whether he has actually helped me to see—what I have been otherwise be