I agree with Picasso as well (but then, not with his treatment of women). We lose the openness and wonder of childhood that gives us the perspective of “creativity” he references. But without the discipline and understanding—yes, that even Picasso had to manage—any recovery of such feelings are ultimately useless. We rediscover the world, then, as children. All well and good and pleasing for the moment perhaps. Perhaps even a moment of beauty. And for that, worth a moment. But then what? And is it art? You can walk out in the street and discover a flower to get the same moment. It is nature. Not art. You don’t even need a flower. You can look up and see a cloud passing in the sky.

This was perhaps Duchamp’s triumph in “found art.” Posing the question. What do we need to create in order to create art? How and why is it different and distinct from anything else in the world? Anything anyone else does? Anything nature does?

Still a difficult question to answer. But the answer certainly isn’t “art doesn’t have to be good,” I can tell you that! And I believe Maya Angelou would agree.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.