Black people have always battled over their art. On the one hand you’ve got those who believe that Kenny G. or even Kirk Whalum shouldn’t hold a candle to Wynton Marsalis. And on the other you’ve got those who would claim with a straight face that Ice Cube is the next Hemingway.
A couple of recent posts deal with this dynamic.
First Mat Johnson.
Then a clip, courtesy of Prometheus 6 and Blackademics:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIWM6XSn17Y[/youtube]
More after the break.
I can understand where both Mat and Larry are talking about. No art form can progress without people who are dedicated to the pursuit of it as opposed to loot, or simple entertainment. Reading the debate between Mat and Shamontiel Vaughn (a self-published author) I’m struck by the fact that Shamontiel doesn’t ONCE mention craft. Her entire post focuses on how much she’s put into marketing and selling her product. Similarly what strikes me about Tyler Perry is how much drive and hustle he exhibited in bringing his plays to life. Mat and Larry on the other hand appreciate the craft AS craft. Mat is concerned with being a better writer and generating literature that lasts, just as Larry is concerned with generating powerful black theater.
There’s a line in the classic movie Hollywood Shuffle that I think is appropriate here. “Hoes gotta eat too.” And I don’t mean this in a snide or sarcastic way–though I always crack up when I hear that line. Artists have to get in where they fit in. By definition all fiction can’t be literature, just as it isn’t possible to have an entire class of “above average students.” The question though is about room. If the resources spent on theater or literature are zero-sum, if for every book self-published by Shamontiel, Mat loses a couple of readers…this debate will become much more contentious. And yeah Tyler is going to have to create his own festival.
But if not? Then both sides can co-exist peacefully. (Doubt it!)
I’ve been reading at a pace of approximately one book per week since the summer of 2003, and my tastes and interests evolved this period of biblio-extravagance. My recently evolved tastes and interests led me to Dr. Samuel Johnson. I had for many years admired his aphorisms and some of his poems, but after I read James Boswell’s Biography of Johnson early last year, I added his work to my reading list. I’ve been spending a lot of time reading and rereading Samuel Johnson’s moral essays (from his Rambler, Adventurer, Idler series) lately. Only Michel Montaigne and Francis Bacon are superior moral essayists in my opinion. Indeed, I think Johnson’s moral essays are superior to even Pascal’s Pensées.
The reason I read Johnson is because he won the competition. At this point, I try to sit with geniuses more often than not when I use up my hours of leisurely solitude. And, I rarely pick up modern fiction until someone, whose tastes and literary wisdom I trust to be similar to or superior to mine, recommends it. Someone like Harold Bloom or Camille Paglia might encourage me to read a novel that has been written during the last 50 years. I just don’t have enough time to investigate the quality of modern novels, and I already have a long reading list of works that would be found on a good Western Canon list, a good American Canon list, or a good Black American Canon list.
All living novelists, short fiction writers, playwrights, and poets, must now compete for my attention against some of the finest who have ever dared to share their writings with the world. And, the level of genius they would have to possess in order to get more than a few minutes of my attention is very high. Few living novelists might surpass my top 250 authors from the past two millennia. And, not only would they have to surpass my 250 to find themselves on my reading desk, they would have to be good enough so that I would rather read their writings than reread the writings of one of my top 250. So, for me, modern artists are more likely to compete against Marcel Proust than Tyler Perry.
Yet I have watched several of the Madea plays and most of Tyler Perry’s movies. I watched them with members of my family or friends who aren’t ardent readers, theater goers or…basically my folks who aren’t culturally literate or appreciative of finer art. Most Americans would find themselves lacking in cultural literacy and knowledge of fine art. Even though the average American does have enough leisure time to develop his or her artistic tastes and cultural literacy, the more popular forms of entertainment, such as television shows (the arch nemeses of cultural literacy and fine art) and popular music eat up most of his or her leisure hours. To most of my family and friends, Tyler Perry’s stuff is funny and even interesting.
Unfortunately, most people I know (including many academics) have intellectual and cultural tastes that would cause them to move Tyler Perry’s plays or movies up above far superior productions of plays written by Shakespeare, Molière, Beckett, Chekov, or even August Wilson (my wife and I recently enjoyed a wonderful production of his very good Jitney) in the competitions for their leisure hours. So, even though I frequently give my friends and family classic novels or theatre tickets as gifts and attempt to hip them to the fine art I can now better appreciate, I still often find myself joining them in watching Perry plays or movies in order to spend time with them while doing the things they enjoy doing. And, I’m cool with that.
Tyler Perry is winning the competition for the leisure hours of millions with his movies and plays. Will his work expand someone’s consciousness? Of course not. Will it make most folks laugh. Hell yeah. I laugh for two reasons. I laugh because his stuff is painfully banal and absurd and my forced laughter eases my pain somewhat. And, I laugh because I see how much joy his stuff brings to my friends and loved ones and I don’t want to spoil their fun by appearing rudely stoic while everyone else is bent over with laughter. However, I suspect, as I continue to expose my friends and family to superior and timeless art, my friends, family, and I will see much, much less of Perry, his unidimensional characters, and his corny play (one might argue he has written several versions of the same play).
There are so many geniuses out there waiting to be found, waiting to put Perry’s art to utter shame. If I will be as good of a friend, brother, father, and husband as I hope to be, then most of my friends and loved ones might soon regret they ever wasted so many hours on Tyler Perry productions. They might wish they had spent more of those leisure hours, hours we can’t get back, reading or rereading the likes of Dante, Cervantes, Balzac, and Goethe or even the amazingly wise moralist, literary critic, poet, story-teller, and psychologist, Dr. Samuel Johnson.
“Yet I have watched several of the Madea plays and most of Tyler Perry’s movies. I watched them with members of my family or friends who aren’t ardent readers, theater goers or…basically my folks who aren’t culturally literate or appreciative of finer art. Most Americans would find themselves lacking in cultural literacy and knowledge of fine art. Even though the average American does have enough leisure time to develop his or her artistic tastes and cultural literacy, the more popular forms of entertainment, such as television shows (the arch nemeses of cultural literacy and fine art) and popular music eat up most of his or her leisure hours.”
I’m fighting the urge to respond to E.C.’s remarks. But I think it’s better to let them fall on their substance.
Culture warriors of all types enjoy parsing art to validate their positions while denigrating those of others. The tragedy of such production is that it exposes its practitioners as neurotic.
Thanks MIB
MIB:
I’m not fond of titles or boxes. Besides, culture warrior hardly suits me. I am also a structural warrior; so, if I must be labeled, I’d prefer a hybrid title. Structural-Cultural Warrior might work. Well, actually that title is also bad. It too would put me in a box.
And I certainly did not mean to denigrate or disparage, only to describe. I do wonder which part of my quoted passage you think is an incorrect description? Perhaps we would disagree over the proper definition of cultural literacy? Perhaps of fine art? Aesthetics? Perhaps we have different opinions concerning the artistic merits of television shows or popular music?
Maybe there is something special about Tyler Perry’s work that I am missing? Maybe it does improve or inspire those who consume it? Maybe Perry’s art is better than the art of some of the playwrights I mentioned?
Please do not fight your urge to correct my thinking. You took the time to quote me and to write something. Why not share more? “Opposition is true friendship,†according to the poet William Blake. If you, or any one else, believes I am on the wrong side of something, then I would appreciate any wisdom you might offer.
I do not know exactly what your problem with my comment is based on your comment. So, if you or tootsie have enough time to school me, you will find in me an attentive and read-up student, one who will assent to persuasive arguments, and one who is ready to learn from those who are ready to teach.
Wow! I’m really digging everyone’s points on such a great topic. E.C. I have to admit that I empathize with you. Since the birth of my daughter five years ago, I too am on a journey of rediscovery of the classics. It’s a joy to read Shakespeare, Joyce, Dostoevsky, Faulkner, Ellison and others for myself and not because of a class assignment. In fact I just finished reading Robert Fagles’ translation of the Aeneid two days ago. But I do think that restricting your choices to the “classics” as defined by Bloom and others will cause you to miss out on the joy of discovering great literature for yourself. Yesterday, I began a breathtaking novel, Pride of Carthage by David Anthony Durham. Among my picks for great recent works of fiction are The Dew Breaker by Edwidge Danticat, The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho, The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini and Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro.
Another sticking point for me is that you omitted the fact that even great writers produced forgettable works that were wildly popular with their contemorary audiences, for example Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus.
My basic point is that the boundaries of human experience are ever expanding and to think that an elite group of thinkers, historians, critics or whatever could gather up all that’s worth reading, listening or watching and put it in a collection is wrong. For example, I think that the character of Omar in HBO’s The Wire is as compelling and complex as any of Shakespeare’s creations. Many works that we consider great were initially overlooked by the critics and public and other works that were much celebrated in their time faded into obscurity. Artists must be free to create and the public must be free to consume. Sometimes great artistic acheivements are appreciated at the moment of creation and sometimes they’re beyond our early reckoning. Even recent history gives us many examples of jazz and blues musicians like Miles Davis and visual artists like Norman Rockwell whose greatness as classic icons derived from popular appeal to broad audiences. Some forms of high brow art, with similar counterparts in haute couture and grand cuisine, initially had vulgar appeal to the masses and eventually worked their way into acceptance by the ruling classes. Other forms of artistic expression, such as body art or tattooing in Europe, first became fashionable among aristocrats and then were filtered into the province of the lower classes. There are many examples of such artistic cross-pollination. Therefore, don’t be too ready to discard a Tyler Perry or Omar Tyree. Although they may not appeal to or inspire you there are many educated folks with good taste that enjoy them (but I have to confess that I can’t mount up the urge to read Zane or Tyree:).
E.C. there is always much more to pop culture than high art folks would admit. I recall Harry Allen talking about how Public Enemy’s sheets of sound technique led him to Coltrane. For me, the sounds of Derrick May and other DJ/dance music producers have brought me closer to the divine than any form of chamber music I have ever heard. To this day one of the best fiction books I’ve ever read was Legend by David Gemmell.
I for one would welcome more diversity in black theater, film, and literature. But obviously, my feelings are not shared by the masses. Tyler Perry has found his market and he is fulfilling their needs.
Submariner:
Your points are excellent. I’d contest none of them, except your opinion about Shakespeare’s Titus. While it may very well be his weakest tragedy, it is hardly forgettable, in my opinion.
I use a large group of critics, lists, and canon’s as guides and helpers. However, I am not led by them. No one should let another person’s canon, list, criticisms, or philosophy of aesthetics dictate his or her consumption of art. Yet most would be wise to seek out trustworthy guides until they have been exposed to a wide range of artwork in the genres that interest them and their tastes have been well cultivated.
As far as tastes go: I do believe I owe my friends and family whatever guidance or suggestions I could give them regarding the cultivation of their tastes. I don’t like terms such as high brow and low brow. These terms are often used to insult people. I prefer terms such as fine art and art. These terms help us differentiate the qualities of artworks.
For me, everything a human being does, that can be observed, could be justifiably classified as art. Indeed, I would agree with Montaigne that the very act of living is art. But, there is also fine art. Fine art does different things for us than mere art does. I’ll not bore you with an essay about my philosophy of aesthetics. I will say that art that does not improve me, or that does not awe me, or that does not challenge me, or that does not offer evidence of inventive or creative genius, is not fine to me.
Tyler Perry’s art does not improve, awe, or challenge me. I doubt it improves, awes, or challenges most of my friends and family. His art is superior to Flavor of Love, all the recent rap videos I’ve caught glimpses of, and many television shows, but it is not fine art. I think it does my folks little good. So I’ll continue to help my folks expose themselves to what I believe is finer art—art that has improved me and would improve them. I’m convinced that even if we all were to live 200 healthy years as members of the leisure class, we still would not have enough time to consume all the fine art that awaits us, and to be improved by it. Time is limited and precious. So, if we’d want to be improved by art as much as our time here would allow, we’d need to cultivate our tastes and prioritize our consumption of the available art, using some guidelines. I hope many of my friends and family will all soon make the transition that I have made—from one who once thought there was enough time for Tyler Perry’s art to one who doubts that there is enough time to squeeze much of his stuff in to a life that might last only a few decades.
I never argued that there is no place for Tyler Perry’s art. I wrote his characters are unidimensional. What theater-goer would argue against me on this? I wrote his play is corny. I don’t think ‘corny’ is derogatory; I think it is simply descriptive. The word is synonymous with trite or banal. Some might argue that Tyler Perry’s plays aren’t corny. These people might find his plays unpredictable and novel. They might even be improved by Tyler Perry’s art. I just don’t know any people like this. Even my friends and family would admit that Perry’s art is corny and does not improve them. They watch his stuff because Madea is absurdly funny, most of the actors are very sexy, and the singers normally flaunt amazing vocal skills. But none of this stuff is genius; it is all mere talent. It is art, but it is not fine art. His art is not even the best available source for uncomplicated gut-busting comedy.
It is my opinion that Perry’s art is so inferior to the art that we have available to us, within or without the genres he uses, that I suspect as my friends and family are exposed to more of the finer art available to them, they will set aside fewer and fewer of their leisure hours for Perry’s art. At this time, most of them have not yet spent enough time cultivating their artistic tastes in order to evaluate Perry’s art relative to other finer artworks. Nor do most of them have an adequate level of cultural literacy to help them evaluate Perry’s art with respect to its intellectual potency. I’ll help them cultivate their tastes and become culturally literate to the extent that I can; I owe that to them.
I’m not trying to be come across as elitist. I’m not trying to denigrate, disparage, or discard. I believe I know the difference between Perry’s art and fine art. And, I believe even Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus would improve my folks more than all of Tyler Perry’s joints combined. I’m trying to look out for my folks, and to be honest about my opinions of the quality of Perry’s art. It’s popular, but it’s hardly fine.
Come on E.C. Titus Andronicus?!! It hardly lives up to the standards of fine art that you alluded to. The hero is a merciless butcher who commits acts no different than those seen in the Saw film series rather than being a man on some journey of self awareness through suffering. While both works may not be forgettable they are hardly images capable of enriching the human spirit or bringing us closer to the divine. I am glad that you are willing to bring those in your sphere of influence into contact with fine art and help expand their horizons (I was lucky to grow up with a mom who loved watching PBS’s telecast performances from the Met and Boston Pops and Masterpiece Theater). Unfortunately, most of us think that fine art is something for a select few and doesn’t speak to the average person. But I just hope that you’re open to being enriched through such cultural exchanges that may happen in reverse from from the vulgar to the refined. By the way, are you familiar with Edmunde Burke’s Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful? Reading your responses has been rather challenging and prompted me into checking it out.
Submariner:
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think Shakespeare’s Titus is Shakespeare at his worst. It is sheer barbarity and I’d not pay to see it on stage. However, it is still Shakespeare—the incredible language, the tricky psychology, the irony, the unpredictability, and the moral lessons. Critics have struggled to find the moral lessons in Titus. I have my opinions. I think there is a lesson or two to be learned from Titus. But it is no Hamlet or King Lear.
And I think that none of us should hold the view that fine art is not for or can’t speak to the average person, especially if the average person we are thinking of is an average American citizen. We are all very wealthy relative to our worldmates; we have access to all the fine art we could consume; and most of us have many hours of leisure time to spend each week. Who should be consuming fine art if not us? Fine art speaks to all of us and can improve all of us. More in our community should learn how to understand it and reap its rewards. More of our children should be exposed to it early.
I am familiar with Burke’s Enquiry. I read bits of it for a philosophy of art course. There are two books that I would recommend that you consider reading instead of Burke’s Enquiry: a good anthology we used for the abovementioned course, Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: The Analytic Tradition, edited by Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen, and Hugh Blair’s classic Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres.
Jumping into the discussion at this point. I guess class warfare can be as ugly as any real conflict involving nations. This was particularly highlighted by David Talbert’s statements about August Wilson in a recent NY Times article. I have to concede that popularity means that somewhere out in the marketplace there are people who use Talbert’s “theater” to find and make meaning. But Talbert should put his work next to Wilson’s and equate the two. I wrote more about that here: http://www.marketingpopculture.com/the_spark/2007/02/the_arrogance_o.html