From: Kitsune Miko

. . . . . could we say that the
"zen" quality be in the interaction between the
subject (person) and stone or tree,
and thus not residing in either one? This might fit
in with Lynn's idea of art as
a social function--something is not art simply
because it has certain qualities,
but becomes art when it interacts with a viewer.
Did I get that right?
--------

Kitsune (still Sandy to me

I have to look at it this way based on my training -

There is no actual "act" shared by the object and viewer. The viewer
projects upon the object the meaning or feeling that his/her life and
experience has provided. The quality then of Zen would be something that
is residing in the viewer. Just exactly what the viewer sees as the
characteristic of the object that could evoke the response can't be
identified individually. In the stone the form alone does it, as nature
produced it. In a bonsai the style, the kind of tree? We vary.

The social part of art is the fact that in an art's acceptance by a group
of people, as in the IBC where we all love our trees, there is a social
agreement in how we are affected or how we respond to these objects. For
an art form to develop there must be some social acceptance that permits
the establishment of conventions, objectives - or it would never get to be
known as an art form.
The interesting part is that we find universal responses - we find that a
majority or many people have a very similar response to certain
characteristics. When this happens the "group" has an art form that they
"live with" and it then evolves as this social group or community itself
evolves.
I know sp-f-f-t about Zen, but so many times have been told I am a Zen
person. Uh, what dat? is my response I finally decided it is because
I have similar responses to art, events or whatever these people who do
know what Zen is have and therefore they think I am like them.
There just are similar expressive projections from individual responses to
art forms, and we find a binding among us for that - and then we fight
like cats trying to keep the conventions and objectives to our own
individual liking.
Ain't we humans a case?! )
In a nutshell, Kitsone, it is our human similiarity of responses that makes
something art. One person may use the word because of a personal response,
but art is really something that is involved in the critical and selective
response of a group or community. Also it is a set-up for defining the
conventions and objectives, etc. That's cool, cause then we have these art
groups for company.

Lynn (without my breakfast so don't take me too seriously)

************************************************** ******************************
++++Sponsored, in part, by Mark Zimmerman++++
************************************************** ******************************
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++