What is art? Is it just the self-reflection of a human sole? A particular human, a single entity in this work. This brings into question intent and what the artist intended. Will the artists’ intent always be communicated through their art? Will the audience members always understand what the artist meant? Of course, without speaking directly to the artist, one will never truly understand the meaning of the art which the audience member experiences. Experience is subjective to time and place, to the feelings surrounding the experience. Did the audience member recently get into a fight with their significant other? Was the audience member hungry? The experiencing-self is different than the remembering-self. We must remember what Dainel Kuhlman has taught us, that the remembering-self dictates how we perceive our past experiences. I bring into question what ultimately someone remembers from their experiences with art.

Recently I attended a musical where there were only four players, not including the piano player. These wonderful people had practices deliberately to give us audience members an experience which we may or may not remember fondly. I will look back on the experience with joy. I was with two people I care deeply about. Two people who are best-friends, I was third wheeling for the evening. Regardless, I recognize the similarities between the musical and the friends I was with; the musical discusses friendship together despite the growing concerns surrounding them. In the musical, two people write about producing a musical. I found the whole ordeal do be tacky; the songs and dialogue had no real substance and was about exactly what it presented itself as, the how-to produce a play with silly songs that discussed nothing of substance. I remember one song in particular about monkeys and playbills, which was particularly ridiculous. I will remember this fondly.

JLS