John Ruskin- Near Interlaken
Hitherto I have used the words imperfect and perfect merely
to distinguish between work grossly unskillful, and work executed with
average precision and science; and I have been pleading that any degree of unskillfulness should be admitted, so only that the labourer’s mind had
room for expression. But, accurately speaking, no good work whatever
can be perfect and the demand for perfection is always a sign of a misunderstanding of the ends of art.
This for two reasons, both based on everlasting laws. The first, that no
great man ever stops working till he has reached his point of failure: that
is to say, his mind is always far in advance of his powers of execution,
and the latter will now and then give way in trying to follow it; besides
that he will always give to the inferior portions of his work only such
Inferior attention as they require; and according to his greatness he
becomes so accustomed to the feeling of dissatisfaction with the best he
can do, that in moments of lassitude or anger with himself he will not care
though the beholder be dissatisfied also. I believe there has only been one
man who would not acknowledge this necessity, and strove always to reach perfection, Leonardo; the end of his vain effort being merely that he
would take ten years to a picture, and leave it unfinished. And therefore,
if we are to have great men working at all, or less men doing their best, the work will be imperfect, however beautiful. Of human work none but
what is bad can be perfect, in its own bad way.
The second reason is, that imperfection is in some sort essential to all
that we know of life. It is the sign of life in a mortal body, that is to say,
of a state of progress and change. Nothing that lives is, or can be,
rigidly perfect; part of it is decaying, part nascent. The foxglove
blossom, — a third part bud, a third part past, a third part in full bloom, —
is a type of the life of this world. And in all things that live there are certain
irregularities and deficiencies which are not only signs of life, but sources
of beauty. No human face is exactly the same in its lines on each side,
no leaf perfect in its lobes, no branch in its symmetry. All admit irregularity as they imply change; and to banish imperfection is to destroy expression, to check exertion, to paralyze vitality. All things are literally
better, lovelier, and more beloved for the imperfections which have been
divinely appointed, that the law of human life may be Effort, and the law
of human judgment, Mercy.
–John Ruskin, On the Nature of Gothic Architecture: And Herein of the True Functions of the Workman in Art
I have written many times here about the importance of imperfection in my work, about how perfection is a false state of being as far as art is concerned. The wonderful passage above from John Ruskin very much summarizes many of my thoughts on the subject. There are a number of lines in these paragraphs that resonate with me, especially that imperfection in some sort is essential to all that we know of life. and the idea that every organism is in a transitory state of constant decay and rebirth.
The perfection is in the imperfection.
Don’t know if I have ever mentioned him here before but John Ruskin (1819-1900) was one of the most influential people of the 19th century. He was a writer, philosopher, art historian, art critic and polymath, as well as a highly talented painter. He wrote on subjects as varied as geology, architecture, myth, ornithology, literature, education, botany and political economy. His writings on art and architecture have resonated for generations, exerting great influence on artists, writers, aesthetic movements, architects, critics, etc.
Art historian Kenneth Clark summarized Ruskin’s writings on art and architecture into the streamlined list of eight features shown below. I always felt, based on the era in which he worked and from reading some of his earlier writings, that Ruskin’s thoughts on art might not fit in with my own views. But the more I read on and from Ruskin and the scope of the creators influenced by Ruskin, I was pleasantly surprised. Most of the items on this list very much align with my thoughts and he even describes, in a way, the need for the organic feel in a work, that idea that I often refer to as a ‘sense of rightness.‘
If you’re interested in art, it’s worth taking a few moments to read.
- Art is not a matter of taste, but involves the whole man. Whether in making or perceiving a work of art, we bring to bear on it feeling, intellect, morals, knowledge, memory, and every other human capacity, all focused in a flash on a single point. Aesthetic man is a concept as false and dehumanising as economic man.
- Even the most superior mind and the most powerful imagination must found itself on facts, which must be recognised for what they are. The imagination will often reshape them in a way which the prosaic mind cannot understand; but this recreation will be based on facts, not on formulas or illusions.
- These facts must be perceived by the senses, or felt; not learnt.
- The greatest artists and schools of art have believed it their duty to impart vital truths, not only about the facts of vision, but about religion and the conduct of life.
- Beauty of form is revealed in organisms which have developed perfectly according to their laws of growth, and so give, in his own words, ‘the appearance of felicitous fulfilment of function.’
- This fulfilment of function depends on all parts of an organism cohering and co-operating. This was what he called the ‘Law of Help,’ one of Ruskin’s fundamental beliefs, extending from nature and art to society.
- Good art is done with enjoyment. The artist must feel that, within certain reasonable limits, he is free, that he is wanted by society, and that the ideas he is asked to express are true and important.
- Great art is the expression of epochs where people are united by a common faith and a common purpose, accept their laws, believe in their leaders, and take a serious view of human destiny.
Redtree Times 