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."
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.