anguish as art

dave long commented on a movie, 21 grams, that anguish was mistaken as art.

of course that got me thinking. my anguish is usually a catalyst for my art. i can't wait until that is no longer the case. i have doubts that i will understand or function in the elation as art category. i will try though.

now i am contemplating art in general. it will be stuck, as fulghum says, like a burr on my mental socks for a while.

clearly i have a lot of growing to do.

what is art?

who decides what is merely anguish and what is art?

i am reminded of a recent comment i made, to some other brilliant person i unwittingly am in communication with, i said, from pain are wrought the greatest poems. i've read some horribly painful stuff from others and it was beautiful art in my opinion. where is the line, what is the distinction?

it must be another one of those totally subjective factors in art.

it reminds me of the blind man, bartimaeus i think his name was, he was screaming, Lord Jesus Christ, Son of David, have mercy on me (my paraphrase).

and everyone around him was going, shhh. you're embarrassing us!

when Jesus stopped and said, "who is calling?" (again, my paraphrase)

all the people around him were patting him on the back as if they'd been supporting him the whole time. "look, the Master calls for you."

i hope i don't kick any blind bartimaei in my path. i probably will, i probably have. but i hope i soon learn to stand beside them and scream with all my might for mercy.

because i sure need it.