|
I was driving out to the country once with Carolyn
and Earle Brown. We got to talking about Coomaraswamy’s statement that
the traditional function of the artist is to imitate nature in her manner
of operation. This led me to the opinion that art changes because science
changes—that is, changes in science give artists different understandings
of how nature works.
A Phi Beta Kappa ran in the other day and said, “Your view is that art follows science, whereas Blake’s view is that art is ahead of science.” Right here you have it: Is man in control of nature or is he, as part of it, going along with it? To be perfectly honest with you, let me say I find nature far more interesting than any of man’s controls of nature. This does not imply that I dislike humanity. I think that people are wonderful, and I think this because there are instances of people changing their minds. (I refer to individuals and to myself.) Not all of our past, but the parts of it we are taught, lead us to believe that we are in the driver’s seat. With respect to nature. And that if we are not, life is meaningless. Well, the grand thing about the human mind is that it can turn its own tables and see meaninglessness as ultimate meaning.
John Cage
|