Several trends have alienated ordinary people from the worlds of both art and intellectuals, contributing to anti-intellectualism and hostility to the arts, as well as simple indifference to the finer things of culture. This is unfortunate because the arts and the life of the mind are both important.
More than 65 years ago, the great cultural historian Jacques Barzun wrote The House of Intellect, a book full of sharp and scathing observations about American society. Many of his observations are not dated at all. Barzun observed that the contemporary, avant-garde art world is often presented as distinctly anti-intellectual, and that many artistic people are aloof from intellectual ideas, while trying to give the opposite impression. This, for Barzun, was symptomatic of a lack of respect for the intellect in society at large.
Many artistic people were not and generally are not among the most intellectual. Perhaps this is because art, although it includes conceptual or intellectual aspects, is first and foremost a practice, an activity. The artist is a doer or creator, not primarily a thinker. You can excel at an art – say, painting or playing an instrument – without having a strong tendency to theorize about it. Art does not only appeal to the intellectual level – this is especially true of non-verbal art forms such as music – but also, perhaps even mainly, to feeling and emotion (“fused spirit and sense” is the way with Barzun).
Many great artists throughout history were not great minds and their art did not suffer from it. Artists often undergo a narrowly specialized education rather than a broadly humanistic one. One can argue whether or not this narrows their minds and perspectives, and whether their art would be deeper as a result of an acquaintance with literature, philosophy, and the arts other than their chosen one. While there are undoubtedly exceptions, it seems that many artists do not read widely or engage with intellectual ideas, nor are they able to relate their art to a broader understanding of Western culture.
But on the other hand, how many “intellectuals” (see academics) must there be who, while immersed in the world of ideas, are insensible to the arts and the beautiful side of life? And that’s a shame. Man cannot live by abstractions alone.
We try to combine artistic and intellectual passions, but by human nature we tend to favor the intellectual – always on the assumption, however, that a good essay can be a work of art.
But what is spiritual temperament? We tend to relate to things on a critical, analytical, philosophical level. The world of books, of commentary, of serious journals is the world in which many men thrive and feel at home. They need consistent – actually constant – mental stimulation or they feel out of date.
This intellectual approach to life also fuels art. You can’t just enjoy a work of art and then go for a meal. Art is not just entertainment, but a stimulus for further thought and reflection. Once you’re familiar with a new work, you need to learn about the story behind it and the critical body of opinion surrounding it.
We tend to see all things – works of art, books, events, people – in a historical dimension, as related to their place in time. A life without intellectual passion and interest, a life lived on a material, present, real level, is for many people unthinkable.
Impatience with waiting in line at the bank, driving in heavy traffic and other things steal time away from reading, thinking about western culture and the like. Clarity of mind is what we constantly seek, and we come to resent situations – social or otherwise – that invade the tranquility of the mind or manipulate thoughts.
Here is one of the main differences, in our opinion, between the intellectual and the artistic temperament. While the intellectually inclined person can produce fruits of labor from his intellect, intelligence as such is not strictly connected with production. The intellectual enjoys pure understanding without necessarily giving birth to anything in creation or art. He is contemplative, enjoying knowledge and truth for their own sake. Understanding, for the intellectual, is its own reward.
Barzun informs us that this particular use of the term “intellectual” dates back to the late 19th century, a time when people engaged in intellectual work sought to distinguish themselves as a class from mass society. The term “intellectual” has a tone of superiority when used by intellectuals themselves, or a tone of contemptuous derision when used by those who consider themselves non-intellectuals. Such loaded rhetoric obscures the genuine use of intellect, which is a noble and serious thing. And it contributes to the tendency to categorize people in terms of mass types rather than as individuals. The substantive Intellectual, it seems to me, comes with too much political baggage…
One must always be on guard against false intellectualism, inflated language and inflated ideas. This is the kind of spiritual pretense. Such higher dimensions of life as the spiritual, philosophical, and aesthetic are usually sidelined in favor of the militant ideological and political, which are inherently narrower and more temporal concerns.
This is true in the art world itself, which has in many cases become profoundly anti-spiritual. Politicized art, art of the absurd, narcissistic or nihilistic gestures presented as art: all manifest a withdrawal of genuine intellect from the world of art.
The purely intellectual world, meanwhile – and this means mainly the academic world – has long since been corrupted by hyper-specialization, a tendency that cuts off scholars in various fields from each other and from the general public.
On the modern worship of the “artist”, Barzun also had a lot to say. There is a modern idea of the artist as some sort of mystical guru or professional madman. I favor a more classical, artisanal view of the artist’s role, one that relies less on self-expression and more on learning and discipline.
All these trends have alienated ordinary people from the worlds of both art and intellectuals, contributing to anti-intellectualism and hostility to the arts, as well as a simple indifference to the finer things of culture. This is unfortunate because the arts and the life of the mind are both important. If we believe that the world bears the stamp of the Word, the divine Word, then we are obliged to cultivate our minds. If the universe is a work of Creation (and not a random and meaningless event), then human artistry and creativity are very important indeed.
Art or intellect? We must be equally committed to both. You can hardly choose between the two. Long live the arts, long live the life of the mind.
