The Secret Life of Walter Mitty and the Quintessence of Life

 By Jonathan Shih

The word Quintessence is originated from Latin, which means Quinta Essentia (Fifth Essence). Hence Quintessence of Life means the fifth essence of life.

According to the western philosophy, the circle of life comprises of four essences: air, fire, water and earth. Air, represents the movement. Fire represents power. Water represents idea or thought and finally, Earth represents the steadiness.

Then what is this fifth element? In the Vedic philosophy, along with these four elements of life, they also recognize the fifth element - Space/Sky, calling them as Pancha Bootas (Five Elements). This fifth element, the Sky, represents the cosmos, the heavenly bodies, our spiritual connection and the self-discovery. They believe, the human body is not only made of the earthly elements it also has a part of cosmos and our journey should be in the path of understanding this cosmos. Cosmos can be understood by understanding the ‘Self’, as the self contains the cosmos. That is, you can’t understand the cosmos without understanding the self and you can’t understand the self without acknowledging the cosmos.

Hence, I think the movie ‘The Secret Life of Walter Mitty’ portray this self discovery mode of the journey of life as the fifth essence or Quintessence of Life.

After writing this answer I went back and watched the move again. I think, my answer for this question was bit philosophical assuming the Quintessence of Life is an abstract concept.

According to the movie, if we assume there was no abstraction, ‘Life’ is a magazine, who’s purpose is (it was written on the wallet sent by Sean):

TO SEE THE WORLD, THINGS DANGEROUS TO COME TO, TO SEE BEHIND WALLS, TO DRAW CLOSER, TO FIND EACH OTHER AND TO FEEL. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF LIFE.

The quintessence is a lost photo, for which Mitty goes through all the adventures. That photo was supposed to be cover of the final edition. Finally, Mitty finds the photo of Quintessence of Life, and that gets published on the final cover. According to that, Quintessence, or that fifth essence that made the Life magazine was the ‘People’. The people who build that magazine.

What Is True Art?

By Jonathan Shih

Art can affect its spectators in many ways, so it is not surprising to see different reactions to the same piece of work. But if we are to define what true art is, it is something which the artist creates for his own satisfaction, without thinking about what the world would say about it. At the same time, true art is something that should be able to connect the spectator with the overall vision of the artist, even though the interpretation might not be spot on. No wonder, Don Ellis once said, “To be a true artist you have to play the way you feel - not the way others think you should feel”.

To further illustrate the point above, true art should be able to elicit emotions and thoughts from spectators. They should be able to see the hidden symbolism of the work because even though the artist should create for himself, his creation should be able to inspire people in order to qualify as true art. At times the subject of many paintings might not be pretty at all, but true art is something which would not only portray the problem, but also provide the solution to it. The spectator should go back empowered and enlightened about what he saw. It holds true for any form of art, be it painting, music, or performing arts – it should be able to inspire personal transformation.

It is now being seen that anything that is a departure from the norm or offers shock value is interpreted as true art. Some of these might actually fall in this category, but anything that tries to be path breaking for its own sake or to benefit the artist cannot be called true art. It is not contributing anything to art as a whole, but is merely being used for personal gains. This form of art is more like a flash in the pan, which soon disappears into oblivion. Meanwhile, true art manages to retain its appeal and freshness even ages after its creation. Take for instance the masterpieces created by Michelangelo or the works of Shakespeare. They continue to charm their viewers and will do so till they cease to exist.

Besides the characteristics listed above, true art should be able to strike the right balance between all the nuanced characteristics of its time. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so reactions to a particular piece may vary, but true art always has a story to tell. This is irrespective of whichever way it is interpreted, but true art should be able to inspire its viewers to look for the meaning behind it.

As you would have realized by now, it is difficult to have an exact definition for true art since it is so subjective in nature. However, a work of art cannot be called true art until the artist listens to what his heart says and is able to express his innermost emotion perfectly through his creation. 

The ‘Artists’ I’ve met and worked with

By Jonathan Shih

               The year 1993 saw a crossroads in my life. That year was supposed to be the last year of my studying Fine Arts, which unfortunately, I didn’t able to finish, due to a few unavoidable circumstances. I eventually dropped out in the second semester of the second year of the course (the BFA I took was a two year course consisting of only Major Subjects).

              After that not so difficult of a decision, I embarked to find myself employment. I will not elaborate every single job I took, for there were quite many, but I would rather talk about, are the different people that I had the chance to work with and met (but in my case, mind torturing chance). I took a course in Fine Arts, so naturally, I would seek a job related to that. Thankfully I did, ever since I quit school. Every job I had, was so called ‘Art related’. 

             Through the ensuing years, I’ve encountered many different individuals in every conceivable character and upbringing possible. As the old saying states, “Birds of the same feather flock together.”, it was natural for me to look for someone who has common interests, a kindred spirit so to speak. But that was not the case for me, every ’Artist’ I worked with and met was not what I expect an ’Artist’ to be, in thought, in deed, in contemplation, interaction and conversation.  

            I know that we all have individual traits and characters, but isn’t it quite natural that people of similar interests are drawn to each other in harmonious union of thought and spirit? That’s what I thought. The truth is, even way back in college, a majority of my classmates and schoolmates somehow don’t know what they want to do with their life. The first semester saw a jam packed class of around 40 students. By the first semester of the second year, the number dropped to to a least 20. Survival of the fittest, so it seems. 

            As a matter of fact. I heard through the grapevine that many of my classmates who graduated or at least reached the fourth year of the course, don’t hold jobs related to their chosen course. Talk about wasting your parent’s hard earned money. Anyway, going back to the ’Artists’ I worked with. Of course, I thought we were going to get along fine. But again, that’s what I thought. Many of them didn’t leave the school behind. Not the physical school, like the building and everything in it, but in the way that what they were mentally and intellectually in school, that’s what they still are in the real world.  

           Some can’t draw or paint. Some can’t make decent letterings. Many of them, all they talk about is basketball, movies, the latest showbiz news, computer games, bands, joining a band, forming a band, clubbing, partying, drinking beer, mountain climbing, beach hopping, the latest cellphones, the latest gadgets, the latest sexy starlet and other insignificant crap that has little or nothing to do at all with being an ’Artist’ and they call themselves ’Artists’. Some don’t know the different types of Artist’s brushes and to think they should know their own equipment. Some don’t know Leonardo da Vinci or any of the Old and Modern Masters of Art, and when they do heard me speak of them, they exclaim, “I didn’t know they were Artists?”, or “What’s his name again?”.         

            Some are numb founded when I mention about Art History and the Great Artists of history. They will ask in an irritating, ignorant fashion, “Who is that, is he an Artist?“, “What did he contribute to Art?”, “Tell me about him, is he a great artist?”. They call themselves ’Artists’, yet they don’t know squat about the Artists who lived before them and made the pages of Art History.

           Some don’t know how to sharpen a pencil by hand. Some can’t make a decent drawing of an eye or face for that matter (so they resort to drawing Anime or they only limit themselves to nonfigurative subjects instead, as not to give the notion that they can’t draw or paint well or can‘t draw or paint at all). 

           Some are only ’Artists’ in the office or workplace. Where they work as in-house ‘artists’, graphic ‘artists’, layout ‘artists’, display ‘artists’, t-shirt ‘artists’, airbrush ‘artists’, sign ‘artists’, billboard ‘artists’, print ’artists’, drafting ‘artists‘, rendering ’artists’, video ‘artists’, nail ’artists’, poster ‘artists’, commercial ‘artists’, henna tattoo ‘artists’, tattoo ‘artists’, background ‘artists’, flash ‘artists’, animation ’artists’, creative ‘artists’, advertising ‘artists’, digital ‘artists’, computer ‘artists’, and every conceivable ‘Artist’ imaginable to the human mind. The only limitation is your imagination.  

           When they get home, they just watch TV, the PBA, the NBA, AXN, Pinoy Big Brother, The Buzz, Game Ka Na BA?, Deal Or No Deal?, Majika, Captain Barbell, Star In A Million, American Idol, the usual Anime, chat, play computer games, play video games, Playstation 1 and 2, X-box, Nintendo, billiards, pool, play Basketball, have a drink with friends and talk about crap, go to the Mall and straight to the arcade, read romance novels, and exchange text (SMS) and other irrelevant shit that has nothing at all to do with Art and in being an artist. Yet, they proclaim to the whole world that they are ’Artists’.  

           Not only the ’Artists’ that I worked with and met are like that. Also, their ’Artists’ friends that they introduce to me and I get to ask and know. So, it’s one big happy, ’Artistic’ family.  

           There is an English adage that states, “If you can’t leave them, join them.” 

           If your convictions are weak and your ideals are shallow. Might as well join the ’Artistic’ bandwagon. Forget about learning to draw and paint. Forget about acquiring knowledge regarding Art and Artists. Forget about Art. After all, we are all ’Artists’, we studied Fine Arts, so we are ’Artists’. So long as you can draw a little and give an impression that you are a ‘artistic’ person, you’re an ‘Artist’. We are all ’Artists’! 

            Some, I might add, didn’t even studied Fine Arts. Some of them took a course in Engineering but didn’t finish it. Others took courses as diverse as Electronics, Architecture, IT, Computer Science, Crash Courses and Short Courses on Design, Commercial Art, Fashion Design, ArchiCADD, AutoCad, Web Technology, Web Developing, HTML, JavaScript,  Drafting Technology, Computer Graphics, Animation, and some of them only reached High School and never even went to college. 

           What a way to go, right? Anybody can be an ’Artist’. Just as long as you can scribble a few lines, and leave a mark on a piece of paper, create graphics on a computer, you’re an ’Artist’. 

           There’s a popular notion and I think that it’s only in the Philippines, wherein self proclaimed, self righteous, and narcissist individuals posing as ’artists’ say that anyone and everyone is an ’artist’, but is that the way it works? Is it that simple? Is it that uncomplicated a way to become an ’Artist’? Am I at a lost here? Have the laws of nature turned upside down?

FArt Ambassadors

By Jonathan Shih

         Is getting a wider audience enough basis for these 'celebrities' to be chosen as artist/art ambassadors? I just wonder what qualifications these clowns possess for the said coveted position as Ambassador? It's no surprise that the Philippines still remains a laughing stock by making such selection. Are there any other more qualified individuals aside from Boy Abunda, Sarah Geronimo, Jericho Rosales and Piolo Pascual? Take a deep breath fellows... This is the Philippines... tsk tsk tsk.

         Obviously the NCCA is a bunch of stupid idiots! Don't you know anything except actors and showbiz? Dog shit! And they're the worst 'actors' on the planet and a bald faggot talk show host and movie 'critic', who doesn't know art if it hit him on his shiny bald head. You are selling Filipino culture and artistry like cheap lugaw attracting flies! 

         Put some brains in art appreciation. Promoting Philippine culture and art is not as simple as popping them out to the mass media, and using these clowns on the media will only promote shallow admiration and fanaticism toward actors and stupid characters and will not produce sustained appreciation and creativity in people. In fact, when actors and gay showbiz people are involved in any promotion of national significance it already constitutes stupidity and brainlessness. True.

THE GREAT PRETENDERS (We are all 'Artists')

 By Jonathan Shih

              “We are all Artists.”, this statement is a popular one amongst so-called ‘Art Circles’ and ‘Art gatherings’ in the Philippines. Spoken and talked about in so-called ’Art’ discussions and given as advice to people who aspire to be artists. They say that we are all creations of God and we possess the powers of creativity. We have the intellect and the hands to create things. But is it true? Is it a valid statement?

               Human beings, the Almighty’s ultimate creation, are capable of doing so many things. After all, humans dominate this planet given to us by God. And to that effect, had been successful in his endeavors, in all aspects of science, engineering, and the arts. And one of man’s many intellectual capabilities is the appreciation of beauty. Beauty in all forms, and in every variety, although each one of us appreciates in a different way, either positive or negative. But aside from that, we have a taste for the beautiful.

               So we all, in one way or another, appreciate Art. But can we be all ‘artists’, as these self-righteous and self-proclaimed individuals assert? 

               Besides Art and beauty, can we also appreciate other things? The answer to that would be yes. I myself, appreciate medicine, but that doesn’t mean I’m a Doctor. I appreciate the splendor of buildings and structures, but that doesn’t mean I’m an architect or engineer. I appreciate the written word, but that doesn’t mean I’m a writer. I appreciate music, but that doesn’t mean I’m a musician. I appreciate films and acting but that doesn’t mean I’m an actor or film director.

              You might say (and the self-proclaimed ‘Artists‘), well, that’s different? You need a Degree in Medicine to become a Doctor. You need to have studied, graduated, and passed the Board Examination to become an Architect or Engineer. You need to have a degree in Journalism to become a Writer. You need to have studied Music and Theater Arts to become a Musician and Actor.

              So, what are you saying then? To become an ’Artist’, you just have to be, a human being? Just as long as you appreciate Art and beauty. Just as long as you can create something with your hands, you are an ’Artist’. Just as long as you can manipulate your hands to draw, you are an ’Artist’. You don’t need to have studied, learned, and draw or paint beautifully, you are already an ’Artist’ because we are all ’Artists’, right?

               Are we not living in reality here? Are we living in Fantasy Land? Where everything is possible and we can be whoever and whatever we want to be? Are we living in a dream? Where your every thought can become true? 

               Unless you have a mental disorder or already a nut case, we are still living in reality here. Where everything is governed by rules and we are created by the Almighty as individuals. We are not created equally. We each possess unique and individual gifts and capabilities. Now, isn’t that closer to reality than saying, ’we are all Artists’?

               It’s true that we can all learn to draw, paint, make a sculpture or other ‘artistic‘ activities. But does that mean that the moment we draw or paint something on a surface, we are already ‘Artists’? Or the instance that we appreciate something beautiful and our emotions are touched and moved by its beauty, we are already ‘Artists’? Or when we discover the beauty hidden in ordinary and mundane things and are stirred by it, we are already ‘Artists’? That’s what these self-proclaimed and self-righteous individuals who call themselves ‘Artists’ are declaring.

               The thing is, this world of reality that we live in is governed by rules. A balance of the laws. Where we each have our own gifts, our own calling, our own place in nature. If we were destined to be only one thing. This world of ours would be in utter chaos.  

                Let me sight an analogy if a cow had a mind to think, and he wanted to be a horse because he’s thinking he can carry a man on his back, and bring him to his desired destination. He can also run fast and participate in races, just like what a horse can do. And what if he can speak to the farmer and tell the farmer that he can be one of the farm’s horses and not just to be slaughtered for food. What do you think the farmer would say to that poor cow? 

                Think for a while that that farm is the world and the farmer is the Creator and Master of the world. And the individual animals are the people that populate that world. And then suddenly all of the animals wanted to be a  horse. And the rest is chaotic history.   

                So, are we all ‘Artists’? As stated by the self-proclaimed ’Artists’? I would have to disagree. The Arts (I’m pertaining here to the Visual Arts), like any discipline and endeavor, has laws and rules governing it. You can’t just say to yourself, I’m an artist, just because some self-righteous individual claiming to be an ’Artist’ says, “we are all Artists”. 

                So, does this indicate that the self-proclaimed and self-righteous ‘Artists’ of this country are living in Fantasy Land?

One with Concerned Citizens

By Jonathan Shih

This letter of mine, was published in the Philippine Star’s Arts and Culture Section dated 15 November 1999. It was in pro-reaction to a letter written by a group of concerned citizens (1 November 1999), wherein they’re reacting to the ‘Grand Prize Winning’ painting of a certain Alfredo Aquilizan in the Phillip Morris Philippine Art Awards 1999. Their concern is that Aquilizan’s entry was a direct copy of a poster of the Movie The Truman Show, starring Jim Carrey (the poster depicts Jim Carrey’s face rendered in Photo mosaic). Which was just recently shown in Movie Theaters in the same year.

To the group of concerned citizens, I commend you all on your courage in reacting against the recently concluded Phillip Morris ‘Art’ Awards. I think it’s about time someone took a stand and tell the truth about the misinformation and the misleading of this so called prestigious ’Art Competition’. If you can call it ’Art’.

Taking the lead of the concerned individuals, this is not the first time that a non-original entry had passed the eye of the ’Art judges’. Not only in the Art Awards but other local Art Competitions as well. In 1995, one work among the 50 finalists exhibited at the Glorietta, Ayala Center, was a direct copy of an abstract painting by the American painter Sean Scully. And in 1994, one of the finalist in the Metrobank Painting Competition, in which the work depicts the crucified Christ in bird’s eye view was a direct copy from a Surrealist painting by the Spanish painter Salvador Dali. I’m appalled and my complaint is not to the artists only, but to the so called ‘art judges’ themselves. If they  are well informed about the current trends in art and artists. And if they read about Art of the Great Painters and Masters of Art, would they have allowed such non original paintings to be included in the finalist, let alone Grand Prize winners?

These so called ’art judges’ and ’prominent artists’ of our country should be the ones in the know and should be well-informed about these things. But, alas, they are the ones who are presently misinforming and misleading the people, artists included, about these things. What a disheartening and sad fact. I want to ask these ’prominent individuals’, are Art Competitions the ultimate stimulus for an artist, struggling or otherwise, to paint and express himself? How do you assess and judge a painting, the individual painting itself or through the persona of the artist who created it. Is it any wonder, why the state of art in our nation, instead of progressing and moving forward with the international art scene, is since time immemorial not moving forward at all? If you think I am wrong about this, how about researching and reading current magazines on the subject, if that is, you ever read at all.

Unequal Practice: A Disease of the Philippine 'Art' Market

By Jonathan Shih

Why does the prevailing art market system is hurting other artists while sustaining others? What ails the system? Simple: it is not equal. It favors the investor and the middle men and their favorites, while using the workforce of other artists as fodder to raise the value of artworks as assets. 

Equitability is different from equality. Equitability means you get what you deserve in proportion to your input or efforts.

The most effort comes from the working class of artists. That's why we call the pieces we make, work. But when these works are delivered to the gallery system, our work becomes inventory. And is randomly given value based on the prevailing market taste. (Skulls were in the rage then, now its flowers over faces). Investors choose a select few among the artists who are "stable" whose brand is "consistent" and "blue chip" like prime stocks. They hedge on these artists so that they can sell them after at a higher price. Hence, the auction house is at the end of the consumption line.

The artists work - his means of livelihood and soul work - is transformed and played as inventory in the primary market and stocks in the secondary market. Where does it all end? As assets in real estate of the collectors houses and properties. 

The system is inequitable because the pattern of consumption of art is not based on the artists MERIT but his VALUE as a BRAND. And this is dictated by prevailing taste. In other words, the Art Market functions like a FASHION or lifestyle market! The one who is in fashion and trending, sells well.

(Guess what, Francois Pinot is both the owner of the top auction house for Art and fashion houses in Europe. Where do you think contemporary art gets its best practices?)

There is so much capital, money coming in to the art industry. This is what makes our art scene survive. Many have invested, there are many investors. But how is this money grown, distributed? Disproportionally.

Investors get the lion share. Galleries get 50% of their INVENTORY And artists are what, entitled to 50% of their single work's market value in the primary market and 5%in the secondary market?!?

And artists don't have social security, medical, housing, benefits! We work 24/7. We don't have a card that punches at 6pm and we cease to be creative! We are the most exploited labor force in the creative industry and we seem to be easily replaced. Mid career artists whose price points go up are not favored. Kasi young artists are easy to invest in. You know, buy low sell high. The investor just WAITS among which of his bets will thrive, die or persevere.

So...the artists are just the fighting cocks. The Art scene is the cockpit and the galleries are the Bet Taker.

This is the disease of the art market: It's a gamble.

You're Probably Not An Artist

By Jonathan Shih

I enjoy and appreciate art as much as the next person, but the fact is, 99% of the garbage out there that people call "art", is anything but. Like most things in life, the art world is polluted by pretentious posers desperate for attention and validation. Considering its subjectivity, how can you tell the difference between God-honest art and some jackass who did a watercolor painting with their balls and called it, "The Psychological End of Romantic Displacement"?

Here are a few handy clues that you're probably not an artist:

1. You're an Art Student (Double if your parents are paying) -- San Francisco is full of trust-fund hipsters who dress themselves up like paper dolls from Vice Magazine, and call themselves "artists" because they think it adds authenticity to their ridiculous and completely inane lifestyles. There's nothing wrong with wanting to drink Pabst all day while listening to indie rock and trying to figure out how to get people to sleep with you (in fact, that's what I do), but don't be an asshole by trying to claim this sort of existence makes you "an artist" or whatever. Also, you'd think you morons could get together and figure out that Art Students were ripping off Basquiat about 8 years before you were.

2. You Do "Performance Art" -- I'm sorry, but being a fucking weirdo doesn't make you an artist. Otherwise, with all the schizos and meth-heads on my block, I'd be living in the middle of the Louvre. Doing weird shit just means you're doing weird shit. So strap all on the little blinking lights, light yourself on fire and rollerblade down the street screaming, "Sister Christian", but don't call yourself a fucking artist. 

3. You refer to yourself as "an artist" -- I think I've met this guy at every party I've ever been to. He's the one who tells you he's an artist before he even tells you his name. When asked about what kind of art he does, you can expect and incoherent string of words like, "evocative", "confrontational", and "avant garde". In fact, if you use the phrase "avant garde" in any context, you're probably not an artist. This person can usually be found at shitty street "art fairs" in small suburban towns, selling overpriced crap to rich soccer moms who wouldn't know the difference between a Chuck Close and a Chuckie Cheese.

4. You've Ever Been To Burning Man -- Burning Man is like Disneyland for deluded jerk-offs who call themselves artists to feel better about the fact that they've sold out and they're just regular old corporate worker bees like the rest of us. Instead of Burning Man, they should just call this the "Annual Worldwide Conference of Upper-Middle Class Pretentiousness and Delusion". I was at this party the other night with a bunch of Burning Man douchebags, scarfing down hummus and vegan lasagna while they regaled each other with stories of their latest "totally amazing" nudist retreat where "everyone had such great energy". Ironically, I wanted to set the whole fucking place on fire.

5. You've DJ'd Anywhere, Ever -- Douchebag.

6. You give people tattoos -- While you are certainly providing a service, you aren't an artist and therefore should not be referred to as such. No, I don't care how good you are. Drawing skulls wrapped in snakes and roses onto the bodies of drunken punk rock kids doesn't exactly make you Pablo Picasso. In fact, name one famous "tattoo artist". Exactly, you can't because there aren't any because you're not a fucking artist. So why don't you get back to work - I'm sure some sorority girl needs her bellybutton pierced.