On Art, Ideas, and Emotion

Tolstoy states that art, in its most basic form, is the communication of feelings, in contrast to the communication of ideas. But are the two necessarily separate?

In a theoretical sense, it is perfectly logical to say that the communication of emotion is separate from the communication of ideas. Put it in to practice, however, and the distinction becomes MUCH harder to maintain.

Many of the tools at our disposal - language, color, actions - can serve both purposes. In practice, it is often extremely difficult to differentiate what is merely "thought" versus was is "emotion." Indeed, much artwork shows not only "emotion," as Tolstoy states, but it communicates IDEAS.

This is not to say that ALL art communicates ideas. A painting of a sunset may not communicate any sort of specific IDEA, but it potentially evokes EMOTION.

By contrast, some "Art" may be all about the idea and devoid of emotion. Much of the artwork produced in the Soviet Union under the Communist regime did not communicate emotion so much as the IDEA of the united worker.

Some "art" may even lack both emotion and idea. The white canvas is something I must return to for this. It conveys no emotion, no real idea, and yet, someone considers it "art." Whether this is a valid claim is something I will not explore... yet.

So, my dear readers, I ask you to ponder this: Is Art Emotion, Idea, both, or neither? Or can it be all of the above? I believe that the fifth option is most correct: Art is Emotion, Idea, Both, AND Neither.