Art and Existence
That Art is necessary to existence may be questioned, as life would be possible—if not very interesting—if regulated only by considerations of utility. In a less cultivated state we are satisfied with the gratification of merely physical wants; so in a more cultivated state Art becomes one of the mind’s necessities.
The dictionary definition of Art is “practical skill guided by rules,” and that of an artist as “one who practises an Art.”
Possibly the former might be better expressed by the statement that “Art is an appeal to the emotions by colour, form, rhythm and sound.”
Art exists not only in that which appeals to the vision, but also in that which is transmitted to the aural sense, as in declamation, oratory and music.
The dictionary particularises the fine arts of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, but to what extent is the possession of examples of these possible to the public at large except in the most general sense?
What is invariably lost sight of is that the personal environment, the furniture and domestic surroundings of the individual constitute the actual field for artistic expression.
It is questionable whether our present system of Art instruction is sufficiently far-reaching, devoted to the training of would-be artistic exponents rather than in the cultivation of the public at large.
“Natural Taste”
There is still a superstitious belief in “natural taste,” and whereas the individual member of the public would immediately, in the ordinary affairs of life, consult a specialist, yet in a matter of artistic selection there is profound confidence in personal exercise of judgment.
It is not contended that taste may not be inherited, but taste may be good or bad.
Good taste is invariably our own; bad, the selection of others, but it is surely irrational to assume that we all naturally possess a knowledge which indisputably takes many years to acquire and cultivate.