Carey, John. What Good Are the Arts? London, Faber and Faber, 2005. Print.
Dear Fellow,
Judge a book by its title. I repeat. Judge a book by its title. It is exactly what I did with this book by John Carey. My personal copy is a gift from the staff at Books2Africa, the largest book distributing agency with the largest warehouse facility for books in Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria so far. However, it is a non-profit organisation. I was at the warehouse during a promo distribution. The promo which was to last for a month only—December 2022—eventually stretched to the end of February 2023. We got books for as low as ₦200 per copy—that is about 13% of the average cost of a book in the Jos book market. It was quite a season in the city. Updates from Books2Africa revealed there was influx of orders from other states across the country.1 A parcel of 50 books sold for 10,000 naira, excluding delivery cost. Perhaps we now have a record of the farthest leap yet in addressing the poor reading culture of the nation.
The Backstory
I was first drawn to the book What Good Are the Arts? by its title. Really, what good are the arts? I think it is a question we have not given careful thought, especially the typical Nigerian parent. I like to add also that it is worrisome to find that our schools do not engage the question as one should expect. The consequence of this neglect by our schools is more evident in our secondary schools. As a science student, I have insider knowledge of how the ill opinions of students in the arts are formed. Teachers have created an undocumented hierarchy of the subjects—sciences at the top, the arts at the bottom, and the middle for the social sciences. Parents do not help either. Parents value their children based on their subject preferences in accordance with the deceptive hierarchies of teachers illustrated above. One time, I witnessed a relative shaming his niece for choosing the arts: he called her timid and fearful. It seems you cannot be anything valuable outside of the sciences, and only a little valuable going through the social sciences. However brilliant the perspectives (which is almost never the case), I think this is a toxic perception for a nation seeking holistic development. It is this burden that drew me to the book. I hoped Professor Carey had something tangible to add to my arsenal against the oddity in my society.
The Reading
The book is divided into two parts. Altogether, the book offers an extensive answer to the question in the title. However, the second part takes on a seeming divergence: it is aptly titled “The Case for Literature”. Professor Carey drew from relevant sources to make his arguments, including science fields like neuroscience and psychology. Of necessity, he takes the reader on a mentally tasking but revealing tour through history to arrive at an all-encompassing definition of art. What follows in chapters three to five—before the second part—are questions all aimed at doing justice to the book title: “Can Science Help? (ch. 3)”, “Do Arts Make Us Better? (ch. 4)”, “Can Art Be A Religion? (ch. 5)”.
You wonder, what then is art? Before an answer, here is a thought worth considering from Professor Carey: ‘Meaning are not things inherent in objects. They are supplied by those who interpret them.’ Having explored the definitions which have sufficed overtime in history, he proposes this definition:
‘My answer to the question “What is a work of art?” is “A work of art is anything that anyone has ever considered a work of art, though it may be a work of art only for that one person.”’
Well, you see the tweak in the question I highlighted in the start of this paragraph. My response to ‘What is art?’ is, ‘It is any form of expression and/or communication.’ The rest of the book is a collection of takeaways, basically.
The Lessons
On the goodness of art, Professor Carey makes a fair conclusion. He demonstrated his regard for the reliability of science as a means to correct judgement all through the book, citing relevant scientific studies. For example, he explored a study by Jonathan Rose which became a book titled The Intellectual Life of the British Working Class. Rose’s study dealt with a similar question that chapter five of Carey’s book bears. Rose analysed autobiographies (mostly unpublished) by late nineteenth and early twentieth century British working class citizens and finds a commonness in their narratives: ‘They often rapturously recall the life-changing moment . . . when they first picked up a book and embarked on their odysseys of self-education.’ Professor Carey’s fair conclusion on the goodness of art:
‘Ever since Aristotle, critics have spun their theories, but they have very seldom recorded how people feel about art, what they like, whether it has altered the way they think and behave.’
Simply put, opinions of art recipients on their response to artworks has not been duly recorded over time, thereby making it difficult to make any reliable assertions about the value of art.
The second part of the book is “inevitably subjective”, as the professor puts it. He runs with the claim that “literature is superior to the other arts”. Well, spare him some breath before you equate him to the majority of teachers in the Nigerian schools I illustrated above. His rating is not bullish. He acknowledged the value of the other forms of art, but politely flaunts his deep appreciation for literature, as he believes that literature alone: (1) Can criticise itself (2) Can criticise anything because “it is the only art capable of reasoning” (3) Can moralise (4) Can disagree and argue. Of necessity, he supplied sufficient examples to the effect of these claims. I think this summarises the potency of literature: ‘Once its words are lodged in your mind they are indistinguishable from the way you think.’ It suggests that you can shape the outlook of a person with literature.
The Conclusion
I do not regret the precious 15 hours spent reading the book. It was a good piece of education. (I got a reasonable explanation for why Shakespeare has high regards from especially literary artists and enthusiasts since his days.2)
Art plays a role in nation development. More importantly, it is disservice to the individual and society to devalue the artistic potentials of a child and subject ourselves to the baseless hierarchies on the value of the arts, sciences, and social sciences. Each field have its respective role to play in our advancement. I agree with the professor on this:
‘Every child in every school have a chance to paint and model and sculpt and sing and dance and act and play every instrument in the orchestra, to see if that is where he or she will find joy and fulfilment and self-respect as many others have found it.’
Stay curious and keep learning, good Fellow. Do not be the one who talks a person out of his or her unique talents and abilities.
Your LetterMan,
Tongjal, W. N.
1 I could not lay my hands on a summary of the stats from the promo. I wish I have it before the time was due for this piece. More importantly, the Books2Africa website emphasises: ‘The fee is not a purchase price as the books are not for sale and are worth much more.’ Check them out: Books2Africa
2 I think Professor Carey’s evaluation of Shakespeare and his craft is the best I have found yet. He alludes Shakespeare’s exceptionality to the indistinctness of his works. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary provides an easier definition for “Indistinctness”: “not clearly recognisable or understandable”. He writes: ‘That is true of Shakespeare’s plays as a whole. Their indistinctness, stirring and challenging our imagination, makes them inexhaustible. He seems to have been capable of this almost from the start of his career, though as his imagination matured it came to dominate.’ Well, maybe that goes since his works could suggest multiple meanings to different readers.
Thank you for that wonderful perspective. The hierarchical system of values exists in Maine education as well, which is driven by the "public-private relationships" system of government which ends up being private business interests displacing constitutional systems of governance. In the long view this too shall pass but where it goes from here depends on how we respond in the present.
Science is great but even the greatest, of which I count the quantum theorists of the Twentieth Century stressed the importance of communicating what the discoveries into the quantum domain mean using two languages- mathematical and general. I think the arts are significant in the latter.
I believe the holistic movement is ascendent. Even in science where "nonlocality" means "wholeness' .