ART and love?

I have often been asked by my friends, family members and fellow peers, “do you love this(referring probably to an art piece I would be working on)? and I would answer quite confidently, ‘yes, I do’. It sounds like a wedding scene doesn’t it? the preacher binding two souls together for eternity. One could say that is how it has been since I understood what it is I could do with my artistic abilities.

I remember in primary school, my friends envied me, because I could draw a perfect box car with the most coolest rims, and a spoiler at the back. They would beg me to draw them a car, and I would…for free! (laughs alone). That has changed though, art has taken a new form, a new face. Reminds me of the movie Face Off starring John Travolta and Nicholas Cage. Art obviously was Castor Troy(Cage) and was taken over by a malicious Sean Archer(Travolta). It has been like that for awhile now where I don’t love art the way I used too. It has politics, discourses, movements etc. But this has not killed my love for art entirely, because I am still creating. That is evidence enough that art is still within me.

As I have asked in the title of this post, does art and love have anything in common. Well I can not say if they do not have anything in common, but I can say with confidence that art is  propelled by love, love for food, love for travel, love of a person, love of a dog, love of oneself and ultimately love for love’s sake. If you go through the history of art, I am sure, as I am sure about the birthmark on my face, that you will find traces of love everywhere. It may not look the way you like it to look like, but like I have said, art has many faces, so does love.

I have often wondered where art will take me, like religion, we wonder about our end, our twilight, our dimming of light. No answers have arrived so far, and honestly I am not fazed about the lack of answers, lack of knowledge as to our end. But if one would to look at art now, 21st century art, you will see that man is no longer being portrayed as of this world. He is ascending, fading away, deforming, floating etc. But he is not of this world. Yet he loves this world, he lives for this world, but aspires to ascend to a new existence, an existence of bliss, an existence of art, an existence of love.

signed. koketso letlape


Darkness beautiful?

I have often contemplated Darkness as a form of beauty, because often, light is associated as beautiful. I have nothing against light, dont get me wrong. But if I had to choose, I would choose darkness. Helena Bonham Carter has inspired this post, for varies reasons obviously.

In the popular Harry Potter series she plays a witch of dark  magic, cunning behaviour and has a ridiculously “witchy” laugh. her character in the movie and novel is, for me, quite interesting. I wont get into detail with that, as it is not my motive to discuss her character in the series.

Helena Bonham Carter

Helena Bonham Carter












I came across this photo while searching for Black and White portraits on Google, I looked at it for almost % seconds and went further down on the search results. But it just happened that I felt the need to see it again, and there, at that very moment I saw it. That beauty, that feeling you get when you pass someone beautiful and you take a second look before you never see them again. I imagined it must have been a nightmare before photography was created to see someone beautiful and face the reality that you might never see them again, that specific person, that specific beauty. I mean look at the image, that glance away from the photographer is not a shying away glance, it is not that she is afraid or worried -no, it cant be that.  she reminds me of the Mona Lisa, it is difficult with such images to decide who is beautiful, the person rendered, or photographed, or the painting or photograph. Such is the mystery I see in such images. I would go so far to say its sinister, the confusion they bring to us is uncalled for, unfair, at its extreme, a crime.

She is smiling…maybe its a smirk, or something like a giggle gone cold, recently happened, not to be seen again. I assume most would say it is just an image of an actress who starred in a popular film, but we all know such statements to degrade personal taste in certain things is just a “difference of opinion” scenario, which can be easily avoided.

I say find beauty in the simple, in the most basic of things. Find it in colour, find it in water, in leaves, dust, clouds, in peoples eyes and smiles, in their tears and laughs.  Because it is the most simplest things in life, the most basic, that make the heart move in the wildest and passionate of ways.

signed: koketso letlape

The relevance of Art

English: Lascaux Caves - Prehistoric Paintings...

English: Lascaux Caves – Prehistoric Paintings. Русский: Доисторический наскальный рисунок в пещере Ласко. Пещера находится во Франции, в Аквитании, в департаменте Дордонь на территории коммуны Монтиньяк. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Andy Warhol

English: Andy Warhol (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Cave men made art, neolithic-man made art, modern-man made art. The question is, are we -modern man-  making art?

Firstly what is art, its definition, its purpose. All the answers to the questions you and I ask are questions we all seek answers to. But we should be aware that opinions differ with regards to everything in the world so we cannot be to sure what the answer is. That however does not hinder us from seeking the ever illusive spirit of art.

Art in a nutshell is expression, expression of form, colour, light, sound, movement and the list goes on. But what separates art from craft or just enjoyment of expression? the answer to that is of course not the easiest of answers. But I will attempt to give my viewpoint on this matter.

Art is expression, that we have established. What separates it from craft and “doodling” is most likely intent. What is it intended for; is it intended to be just a rendering of an image or idea, intended to shock the public or lull them to sleep, to inform, to criticize or even amuse. These are just questions that spring at the top of my mind, not that they are of the out-most importance, but I do not, also, write them off as unimportant. Art has many faces, and some of these faces do not look pretty. Artist like Jeff Koones, Andy Warhol and Damien Hirst are thought to be artists of a raging capitalist system. Their art in honest fact does nothing to uplift people, none the less it is considered art -modern art- if not anything else. What I am trying to say is that their mundus operandi or intent, is of worldly status. When we now contrast Art of the “primitive” man we see a different art. Cave drawings found in the Lascaux caves or the African rock art by the bushmen, there we see art, with a different intent. The art of that time played a much bigger role in terms of its message its intent. It wasn’t for the individual or the up-liftment of the individual, but for the collective, for the benefit of the tribe or village.

Contrasting these two art-forms is almost unfair to both the people who made them because the context is different. Humans have evolved and so have their ideas. But art records that, art records what the people of that time value, their ideas. It records what they do for a living, what they eat, how they behave and so forth. So we go back to the question, what is the relevance of art?

The relevance of art in our day and age is that it is our own personal history recorder. The amazing thing about art is that it does not subjectify, it is a collective source of information historical information recorded by people -artist most of the time- who show exactly what is happening and not saying things just to fill the pages of history.

I will end here, for life is a daily journal and ideas change daily.signed Koketso Letlape