> Normally the writer's craft is so obvious that it buries the art. When the art buries the craft, you have something special.
This kind of formulation is upsetting because art and craft are the same thing (in many languages they're the same word, too). If you can't see the "art" "behind" the craft, then the craft is poor. The whole purpose of craft is to hide itself.
Now, the craft is usually so poor that we made a whole other concept for "good craft", and that is "art".
It wouldn't be a problem if "art" was just a shorthand for "good craft", but then it took a life of its own, and became associated with miracles, "gift of God".
- - -
That said, to me, "the best movie I've ever seen" is A Few Good Men, by the same Sorkin. I can't wait to see this one!
That is what the word art came to mean post-Romanticism. Pre-Romanticism, the distinction was made between art (craft/skill) and genius (inspiration). See Critical Theory Since Plato if you're interested in reading how past thinkers approached artistic creation.
You can't express yourself if your skills are poor.
You're right that someone who has nothing to say will create artifacts of low value; but I would argue that expression is a function of one's mastery of the craft.
There is a recurring theme in PG's essays about how computer languages affect how you think and therefore, what you can say using them. This is also a common theme in the "suits vs. geeks" debate; if you can't code, how can you imagine what code can do?
In general the (philosophical) jury's still out on whether language predates thinking or the other way around; but it's a fact that all great "artists" produce their best work after many many years of practicing and perfecting their craft.
> You can't express yourself if your skills are poor.
Bob Dylan is not a very skillful singer, and he is far from the best guitar player (especially early on, when he used very few chords). The same can be said of Johnny Cash. Yet they both expressed themselves very well, and their art was good enough to propel them to stardom.
This kind of formulation is upsetting because art and craft are the same thing (in many languages they're the same word, too). If you can't see the "art" "behind" the craft, then the craft is poor. The whole purpose of craft is to hide itself.
Now, the craft is usually so poor that we made a whole other concept for "good craft", and that is "art".
It wouldn't be a problem if "art" was just a shorthand for "good craft", but then it took a life of its own, and became associated with miracles, "gift of God".
- - -
That said, to me, "the best movie I've ever seen" is A Few Good Men, by the same Sorkin. I can't wait to see this one!