I recently encountered the theory that the evolutionary purpose of art making is to foster community. I think there must be more to it than that because in my experience this theory applies a lot better to some arts than to others.
Take musicians for example. An individual musician usually spends quite a bit of time alone practicing their instrument. But they also tend to collaborate and form bands and then perform their works for groups of other people - community.
Writers and visual artists are a different story. Writing and visual art require massive amounts of solitary work and then there's no guarantee that more than a handful of people will read or see the results.
Viewing art and reading tend to also be solitary pursuits. Artists and writers need a broker to find them a potential audience and then their audience
might appreciate them one at a time. In turn that audience needs to discover that others have also seen the artist's or read the author's work. Only then can discussion and community begin. Not a particularly efficient social system.
I'm an introvert and I thrive on the alone time it takes to make art. What I'm not so good at is figuring out how to find a good community for me.
I went to art school in part to find other artists to talk to. That was disappointing. The open-minded, free-thinking artist is a myth. It was cliquier than seventh grade. I think I might have three friends from seven years of art school. (Although maybe I'm really referring to art students rather than artists. Many art students are studying art because they think it shows how cool they are. Then some of them go on to become artists who think the same thing)
Anyway, I have hope for the Internet as social network and community builder.
Blogging is a very direct means of self-expression. In a conversation with a physical person you have to consider who you're talking to and adjust for your interlocutor. If you don't have much in common with the people you regularly interact with it can definitely limit your ability to talk (and think) about the things you care about.
When you blog you get to pick the topic, what you want to say about it and how you say it. There aren't any social niceties about leading into a conversation or give and take. You just put your idea out there and anyone who wants to join you in talking about it can.
And it really could be anyone. The conversation isn't limited by geography or physical presence or whether you know a person or not. I
love this!
I can just blurt out anything I want to. If you think it's weird you can move on to another page and I don't have to see the "I'm afraid of you" look you just gave me.
Blogging is also a much more efficient way to foster community than visual art making. Maybe not physical community but conceptual community. Physically I'm alone but I know (from comments) that I have company out there somewhere in the world.
A piece of art or artifact
is an expressive object, a means of non-verbal communication by the person who made it. But that communication depends on others' ability to decipher the object's language - a very risky proposition. Communication can't be the most important aspect of making art (and therefore art's evolutionary purpose) since making art accomplishes other more personal functions far more successfully.
Could the evolutionary purpose of making art be as simple as the fact that making art makes life livable for some people? I think most non-musician artists find making art socially detrimental. And yet it must be done. I think that art making's value is specific to artists. Musicians would still make music if no one were around to play with or to listen to them. Maybe not the one's who got into it for the chicks though.