Sunday, October 9, 2011
RE to Success of Failure
Interesting document. To reiterate: Fisher's main concern is of the excessive preoccupation with success as something that has been isolated and glorified, rather than a personal byproduct of a given occurrence. He points out the complexity and nuances of this concept that we’ve come to pigeon hole and begs us to question our modern day attitude towards it: People interpret success in so many ways that how can it be one pure thing to strive for at all? Doesn’t our fear of uncertainty impede our ability to obtain success, which in and of itself turns out being unquantifiable? Hasn’t the idea of success become a limitation or finish line for things that should continue to be worked on, re-defined, and evolve over time? Why do we feel the need to hide our failures from others? Fisher points out that satisfaction for something becomes all the more difficult, and perhaps even impossible, when we have such high expectations of a result. It seems that the expectation and obsession for success is related to the occurrence of failure; the harder you struggle to reach the mental construct of perfection (an impossible feat), the further the imaginary object travels and more likely you are to fall, especially when you ignore or resist the possibility of falling. Basically, Fisher wants us to think of falling itself as something that is not as fruitless as we tend to think. I thought that the story about Picasso was particularly interesting. I feel like I understand what was meant when Picasso said “I can make fake Picassos just as well as anyone else” In other words, the artist could tell when he disappointed himself by ripping off an old idea he’s already created. I experience that sometimes.
Success of Failure
Joel Fished poses an argument over the existence of ‘failure.” Failure is not really a failure at all. It’s interesting to think of failure as an intangible mystery substance. I liked the point about intentional vs unintentional failure; How unintentional failure is more of a lesson and how intentional failure is more of a backhanded success: the acceptance that all is lost. Very negative thinking. And oh, how easy it is to stew in your own negativity! Trapped beneath its murky, sticky weight and blinded by doomly racing thoughts until everything’s forced into emergency shut-down. I think I’ve been doing that a lot lately; automatically jumping to the conclusion that I’m lost with a certain idea and hopefully I’ll have better luck next time. At least, when it comes to art. BWAAHh!!! No!! I need to stop that poisonous kind of thinking. It’s interesting to begin to consider that failure, as it’s been seen in my mind lately, is a really skewed perception. Even the most unproductive, miserable creative dry spells are really just mere speed bumps in the road. They’ll slow you up for a bit, but in the end you’ll come out with more experience and knowledge to plow through with a little more understanding of things, even if it’s just an understanding of the experience. Success is one dimensional, where ‘failure’ has a secret trap door at the end of its blackness, leading to more possibilities and ideas and options. It’s more of an intelligent mindset, I think, to perceive ‘failure’ as a learning experience rather than an execution sentence.
Response to "the Success of Failure"
It's odd- I've seen perspectives similar to Fisher's before- specifically as it applies to the subject of failure. Everyone is fond of pointing out that failure builds character, creates opportunities that might not otherwise have existed, and we even like to question the idea of failure- can it truly exist? This is a brand of revisionist philosophy, fairly consistent with the spirit of our times that urges us to turn what we are given to believe on its head, and only then will we find the truth.
Nevertheless, Fisher represents his point of view eloquently, and it is especially well-taken when the philosophy is applied to art. Defining failure in the arts is notoriously difficult, and I remember more than a few critiques during which we would define success in terms of intention.
If a student said that something "looked sloppy," another might remark that the look of sloppiness was "intentional."
We were all then forced to speculate as to whether or not the artist meant for his or her work to appear haphazard, as though this had any real bearing on the quality of the piece itself.
In any case, Fisher's was an interesting take on a fairly familiar perspective.
Nevertheless, Fisher represents his point of view eloquently, and it is especially well-taken when the philosophy is applied to art. Defining failure in the arts is notoriously difficult, and I remember more than a few critiques during which we would define success in terms of intention.
If a student said that something "looked sloppy," another might remark that the look of sloppiness was "intentional."
We were all then forced to speculate as to whether or not the artist meant for his or her work to appear haphazard, as though this had any real bearing on the quality of the piece itself.
In any case, Fisher's was an interesting take on a fairly familiar perspective.
Joel Fisher - Success of Failure
The article deals with a fundamental question of the role of failure in artistic pursuit. Traditionally, "Success" has been defined as the achievement of a finished product or perfection. This definition of success inherently means that there are a lot more instances of failure in our world. All the risks to achieving a goal are termed as "failures".
Traditionally, unfinished work is viewed as failure because abandoning the pursuit of work is usually thought to be in recognition of the fact that continuing on that path to the logical end will lead to failure. However, another way of looking at this is to imagine a work to be complete at every point in its development and thus there is technically no "unfinished work" that can be easily categorized as failure.
This new, "non-definite" nature of failure can benefit us in a few different ways in the pursuit of art:
-- The fear of failure can be a good indication of how far we are comfortable to push ourselves. Perseverance through this point can lead to the "success" of an approach/idea/process and give us more tools for the future.
-- Having a goal that is almost impossible to reach can be another driver of failure (in the conventional - achieving perfection terms). However, pursuit of such a goal can lead to the opposite of failure as it can help expand the pursuit and the final work to a point that could not have been achievable otherwise
We tend to deal with success publicly and failure personally. However, the biggest risk is the risk of not recognizing a failure to ourselves. An acknowledged failure becomes a lesson and a stepping stone for the next pursuit (and hence doesn't end up being a "failure"). On the other hand, not recognizing failure and dealing with it makes the pursuit of any idea much harder. Every analysis of failure can teach us more about our self, or the pursuit of an idea, and thus can only benefit our growth.
A scientific method or inquiry relies solely on the pursuit of failure. Every hypothesis that is tested is with the expectation of finding failure. By failing again and again science inevitably leads to success. This is in contrast with the art world, where "success" is highly valued and stressed. This inhibits the pursuit of playful "experiments" in art. Public success in art is placed so high that it becomes difficult to pursue a path fraught with the idea of failures. This ends up resulting in creating highly skilled craftsmen rather than skilled investigators of ideas and curiosity in the art community. Even though a purely scientific approach to art might be an extreme, there is a middle ground of allowing artists to take liberties in pursuit and failure and taking pleasure in the little failures rather than create an expectation of epic success.
Traditionally, unfinished work is viewed as failure because abandoning the pursuit of work is usually thought to be in recognition of the fact that continuing on that path to the logical end will lead to failure. However, another way of looking at this is to imagine a work to be complete at every point in its development and thus there is technically no "unfinished work" that can be easily categorized as failure.
This new, "non-definite" nature of failure can benefit us in a few different ways in the pursuit of art:
-- The fear of failure can be a good indication of how far we are comfortable to push ourselves. Perseverance through this point can lead to the "success" of an approach/idea/process and give us more tools for the future.
-- Having a goal that is almost impossible to reach can be another driver of failure (in the conventional - achieving perfection terms). However, pursuit of such a goal can lead to the opposite of failure as it can help expand the pursuit and the final work to a point that could not have been achievable otherwise
We tend to deal with success publicly and failure personally. However, the biggest risk is the risk of not recognizing a failure to ourselves. An acknowledged failure becomes a lesson and a stepping stone for the next pursuit (and hence doesn't end up being a "failure"). On the other hand, not recognizing failure and dealing with it makes the pursuit of any idea much harder. Every analysis of failure can teach us more about our self, or the pursuit of an idea, and thus can only benefit our growth.
A scientific method or inquiry relies solely on the pursuit of failure. Every hypothesis that is tested is with the expectation of finding failure. By failing again and again science inevitably leads to success. This is in contrast with the art world, where "success" is highly valued and stressed. This inhibits the pursuit of playful "experiments" in art. Public success in art is placed so high that it becomes difficult to pursue a path fraught with the idea of failures. This ends up resulting in creating highly skilled craftsmen rather than skilled investigators of ideas and curiosity in the art community. Even though a purely scientific approach to art might be an extreme, there is a middle ground of allowing artists to take liberties in pursuit and failure and taking pleasure in the little failures rather than create an expectation of epic success.
Kelsey 4 Kate
"It makes me feel like I'm crazy and over emotional. I'm never actually sure if my emotions are warranted or not. When I have panic attacks it feels like my stomachs in my throat and I can't breathe around it. Sometimes I cry. When I'm alone it's all I can think about. I try to not be alone very often. I'll do something to distract myself from thinking so much. I have to convince myself I deserve things in order to allow myself to have them. Part of my anxiety is not being sure if I deserve what I'm given. I'm always feeling guilty. I place a lot of pressure on myself to be right. And I'm not so that makes me feel it."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)