The discussion we were having about resolving the desire to work intuitively and the desire to enter into artistic/stylistic debate (David Minton – Dead and Dying Flowers post #50, and my posts #4 & #5, in addition to comments on those posts) has taken a turn to question objectivity and subjectivity, which is perfectly natural and opens a mammoth tin of worms. But being the inquisitive minds we are we’re going to tackle it.
David comments: Jane, If, whilst nailing a message to a post in the company of another, I hit my thumb with the hammer, we can both see the hammer but only I can feel my pain. An objective hammer and subjective pain?
David, I think the hammer is in a state of objecthood, your feeling of the pain is phenomenological, the person with you is a witness to the event and the message on the post is a subjective communication by you to the world.
Grammatically speaking, you (the subject) feel the pain (object) caused by the hammer (indirect object), that is, in a sentence construction of this sort. All three of those elements can change position and their grammatical value changes as does the emphasis of the meaning of the sentence. I mention grammar here only because it seems philosophy has taken a turn into literature with the work of Jacques Derrida, which has a bearing on art.
If I look at the hammer and you look at the hammer and we agree it is a hammer that is an objective conclusion. However, it could easily be argued that we recognize the symbol of hammer and so understand the object in front of us as a hammer, in which case it is a subjective conclusion.
If you depict a hammer, a red thumb, a bent nail and a fallen message, it could be a subjective depiction of the inability to strike true thus causing undue harm and a failed attempt at communication.
If you see a hammer depicted with a caption reading ‘hammer’ and you have no reason to doubt the source where you see the depiction, it can be said to be an objective depiction. The trouble with that however, are there any sources which are beyond doubt? And is the giving of information (i.e. education) the beginning of conditioning?
I don’t actually believe in objectivity except as chance. And absolutely all of this is up for refutation and debate. This is my understanding of objectivity and subjectivity off the top of my head without delving into the study of any of these issues further – something which I think my reading is about to lead me into.
