So like...idk I'm not sure how to explain this.
I can enjoy art, and I can appreciate and respect art. But like...I don't know how to enjoy things "abstractly" per se?
What i mean is that I like reading and movies and paintings and such. But I can't enjoy "classics" per se. Nor can I enjoy Avant-garde art. But I can respect both. I want to enjoy both too. I've tried reading both Le Miserables and dream of the red chamber but both times ive put them down fairly quickly (although the dream of the red chamber book I was reading was a fairly old translation, so maybe that was it). Ive also tried reading some poems out of Vladimir Mayakovsky's "the backbone flute" but they havent ellicted and reaction from me. And I really, really respect avant-garde work. I would rather someone like Yoko Ono be successful over Blake Shelton, because Blake Shelton makes the most generic crap, while Yoko Ono actually tries to make things different and interesting.
But I kinda would rather listen to Blake Shelton (obviously if I have broader choice I'm picking someone like Woody Gunthrie or Phil Ochs, but if it was between Shelton and Ono, it'd be a tough choice).
So I guess my main question is how do people enjoy art in the "abstract" way (again, I know that's not a good term but idk what else to call it)? Because I see critics and such wax lyrically about this stuff and they seem to really enjoy it so I wanna enjoy art like that too, beyond "oh it's pretty" or "oh its fun."
If I understand right what you're getting at, I think some of that stuff comes from studying the medium and then having an appreciation for when you notice somebody is doing technically impressive stuff. The other form of it that I'm aware of, when people like read a story and get deep into analysis of its symbolism and stuff, seems like a good half bullshit at least; I say half because while they might be constructing a legitimate metaphor out of it, it's probably not what the artist had in mind and is more likely some form of projection on their part.
Ultimately, people like different things and sometimes for different reasons. And although there are consistent technical elements to a given craft (I'm not going to act like artforms are all random choice), there's also a certain amount of going by feel and a certain amount of "why did this person's work become famous but this person's didn't? dunno."
Then there are those times when we actually have an answer for why something got pushed as it did: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
Sorry, I'm starting to realize I've phrased things poorly.
It's not necessarily what is big and what isn't. Trust me, I dont mind not enjoying what a lot of people are into while liking my niche.
It's more like, I do really enjoy certain works, but I dont think I enjoy them the "right way" (for lack of a better term). For instance, I really like Neon Genesis Evangelion, but I feel as though a lot of the philosophy gets stuck halfway in my head. Like i pick up on some the literal things, and I think I can feel what the creator is trying to say, but I myself can express it. And I think I fail to enjoy those concepts and more enjoy the cerebral feeling of it and others like it, like Slay the Princess.
I should've also emphasized my lack of ability to enjoy poetry. I've enjoyed something in basically every other medium, but for some reason poetry doesn't click at all for me. I've always failed to find the rhythm with it and while others will gush with happiness about them I've just...haven't had the same experience (especially with Haiku. I've tried, but Haiku I just can't write nor really understand very well. Constraints are good but I think English doesn't work well with the restrictions).
And on the modern art stuff, I understand the CIA supported it and such, but I still do like it. And that same abstractionism is found other places too. Avant-garde art is a thing in china and the Avant-garde movement in Russia/the early Soviet union produced what I think are good works too. One of my favorite is El Lizzitsky's "Beat the whites with the red wedge." I also do like Picasso's work, and he certainly was no cia stooge. Hell, I even like "who's afraid of red yellow and blue." If strictly for the reason that it did inspire fear and anger in people.
I'm not gonna lie I feel like a lot of people who say they "get" some piece of art actually don't and are just saying that to fit in. And like I don't think haikus are some sort of genius format, in fact they are very easy to make (even more so in English). The simplicity is part of the beauty because it forces you to talk about simple things and be evocative, but it's not some exercise in genius.
And some people are on a whole other level from you or I, absolutely. Personally I kinda experience art the same way you do. My brain is too analytical to get lost in the experience. And a lot of art is made to be consumed. I was reading the Count of Monte Cristo and it doesn't have any pretense that it's trying to be transformative or revolutionary; back in those days (same with Les Mis), writers were published in newspapers one chapter at a time, so they had an incentive to write long stories and popular stories, i.e. stories that the people would read as they would drive newspaper sales. Monte Cristo is good and I really should get back into it, but I was actually surprised at how easy it was to follow. It doesn't try to win any points for style, it just tells a story. You could absolutely transpose it to another media form, it doesn't "have" to be a novel.
But I don't think the way you experience art is wrong per se or needs fixing. It's an elitist point of view to say "well this went over your head, but not mine!" like some people do (whether they say it flat out or not). I've always had trouble connecting with the deeper themes of a story exactly because for the life of me I can't really connect deeper than what the novel/game/etc. is showing me. One game that kinda broke that away from me was Paranormasight, it's mostly a VN but it's on the shorter side, I binged it over 3 days after having it sitting on my computer for over a year, it was that good. After that I downloaded a bunch of classics (the When they Cry series, Raging Loop, The House at Fata Morgana if you want the recs). My next read is probably going to be Romance of the Three Kingdoms after I (surprise surprise) played the new Dynasty Warriors; the dialogue is basically lifted from the novel.
Also some stuff truly is just slop that gets passed for some sort of genius because it's big in scale. Like Skyrim's story is nothing to write home about. I remember getting to the Forlorn in whatever city they're in, and they're a popular Indigenous resistance movement to the Nords, which they consider to be invaders in their land. Lots of parallels, lots of interesting things to explore. But then the game explores none of that, and you kinda have to make up your own headcannon for what you want the Forlorn to be. It's good that they included this faction but that's about it. There's nothing special about it and it's okay to say so and not fawn over a piece of media just because it's a big name.
I think maybe we need the right piece of art to connect with to start exploring that side of ourselves. Ultimately for me what's interesting is the process of getting there, it makes me think about how the author/s must have gone about it. RoTK has genius writing because of the stakes at play. You follow the best commanders of the time and get a glimpse into their actual stratagems, way of thinking, etc. And of course there's a ton of characters in that book. Everyone in that book is a strong character and a genius in their own way, and they are pitted against each other, each standing on their own, and I'm just here thinking... how did the author even go about writing that? Like damn. Compare the strategy writing to Romancing Saga 2 (a mission I played recently lol the strategy made no sense and it was hailed by the characters as being a genius thing), or the Napoleon movie from not long ago - I remember critics didn't really like that Napoleon was just talking about strategy but you didn't actually see any of it on screen.
But I digress lol.
But as with everything, you must struggle with it if you want to deeply understand it, and you'll understand it in your own way. The story in Paranormasight stayed with me past playing the game and I started thinking about how they integrated video game mechanics into a VN, the themes that the game explored, etc. It led me to a discussion and I realized that good horror is centered around family drama, and beyond the "oooh scary monster" it tells a story of family drama. With that, I deepened my understanding of horror a little bit more, and it was the perfect story to get me thinking about the deeper themes of their story.
With all of that said, I have been exploring my artistic side more recently. I think a lot of it is simply age. With age, I started understanding some art better. As a kid I didn't like poetry at all, and now I might enjoy a verse or so if I come across it. But again there's a lot of slop out there too!
PS: a haiku I wrote a long time ago :)
My point there wasn't that modern art is bad. Just a side note about what contributed to it being pushed as much as it was at the time. Which apparently was the wrong tack anyway, since I guess you are not talking about popularity but something else.
Is it possible you are on the autism spectrum? I mean nothing bad by that, to be clear. It's just a kind of neurodivergence to me. But I ask because if I understand right, some people on the autism spectrum have this thing of taking things very literally. So I wonder because you mention picking up on literal things. The other thing I wonder is, is English your first language? That might contribute to English feeling clunky, if it isn't your native tongue.
As for enjoying poetry, I'm not sure what to say about that because I can write poetry myself and enjoy it to a point, but some of it feels very nonsense to me, like it's hiding behind a lack of meaning with flowery prose. Lemme see if I can do an example:
Leaves crunching send signals into the air,
Of autumn's arrival,
Carried on an eagle's cry,
While blackened hearts live free or die.
^ I don't know what this is supposed to mean. I strung together some stuff that sounds vaguely metaphorical and like it might have a deeper meaning.
Or sometimes poetry can feel up its own ass with acting like it's deeper than it is. But I do think it has a purpose, which is expressing things that can be hard to express otherwise:
Emotions blend together like red and blue,
But don't make purple.
Disparate and disconnected,
Unable to find sequence,
They show the DNA of traumatic suffering.
Here I'm trying to express something about how confusing emotions can be sometimes and how they may be harmed at times by trauma.
I don't know if I'm making myself clear or better understanding your meaning at all, but there's an attempt.
Maybe? Idk, I might but I'm unsure if it's that or adhd or just general cptsd issues.
But otherwise I think you're understanding me well, but English is my first language. It's more just specifically Haikus that I find clunky in English, and I've heard they're more natural in Japanese.
Haikus in English have always felt like a gimmick to me more than anything else, FWIW. Now that I'm thinking about how Japanese flows with its syllables, they would probably make way more sense in that language because (for lack of a better way to put it) Japanese draws out each syllable more and languages like English more slur things together. So I imagine in Japanese, it'd make a lot more sense to have a particular syllabic limit and be getting much more out of it.