Students of science generally look down upon students of arts. In contemporary Indian society, a science student supposedly has a greater chance of success. The pecking order is science, then commerce and finally arts. I, too, am an engineering student. Yes, I too at times ridicule the Arts, but not too seriously. Never too seriously.
The "Arts" field is one heck of an open field. There are so many options! You can go for theatre, literature, philosophy, psychology, archeology, artistry, politics and whatnot! These fields of study have their own share of knowledge, beauty and wonder.
I have always wondered what makes an Arts student different from a Science student. Well, generally people who take Arts have little or no interest in maths and... that is about it, really. The stupidest stereotype I have heard about Arts students is that they take up Arts because they are weak in academics and can't handle the sciences. A lot of Indian parents' do think so (thankfully not mine). But how wrong is that? The first thing people should realize is that the Arts stream can ensure quite a buck if you do well. But this "doing well" hurdle is supposed to be very high for Arts. Not everyone is cut out for it - is what most people believe. But it is the same with science. You will earn money only if you manage to "do well" in your exams and the work that follows. If you don't do well, then the principle applies - you are not cut out for it. We just tend to ignore such stuff when someone takes up the science stream. To be rich and famous using science is equally difficult as being rich and famous by arts. Both require talent and effort.
Science requires a creative mind. So does Arts. The main difference in these streams of academics is about how your creativity flows. Science wants you to follow a neat, methodical approach for you to work on it. You must have a reason for every step of yours. Every operation must be pre-defined before using it. If you manage a concrete theory out of it, nobody can question it. It is just the way it is.
When it comes to Arts, it is about how the general public look upon your piece of work. There are no concrete rules mapped out by someone which make your work a great piece of art. For example, you write a book. Some people will like it, some might find it average, some might find it subpar, others will hate it. You can never be sure. Such is the beauty! There is randomness at play here! Different people, different minds! Deciphering the order out of this chaos is nigh-on impossible. Here is the big difference in Science and Art. Your work in science, if it follows the set rules, then you get appreciation. In Art, there are no set rules! Kind of like fashion (which I know nothing about, by the way)... But I know this one adage about it: fashion keeps changing. Identifying the current fad is key while writing a book, or painting a picture, or making a movie. You need to know what people are after. As of recently, John Green books are being doled out in bookstores. About 6 months ago, you could barely find his books in large-scale bookstores. Now nearly every bookstore has collections and collections of his books. Just cashing up on the sudden popularity.
Nonetheless, just following the current fad every time is not going to help you every time. It just might be that whatever you are good at does not match up with it. But that is why being good at art, your work being liked by many different people is an achievement in itself. I doubt that all would like what you have done, but if majority do, that is still great.
In the end, Art and Science as two branches of study is completely paradoxical, in my opinion. Everything we study technically with logic and reasoning is termed as "Science". And well, defining Art is much tougher... more of an abstract concept, it is. But whatever you manage to do by instinct and imagination, when you have too many variables in place and the equation is possibly unsolvable by science, that is when Art comes in. It does kind of resemble number theory... Well, maths is not a science, not an art, it is something higher, anyway.
Whatever you do, never judge any science before studying it. Very thoroughly, at that. Every subject has its own charisma and secrets and paradoxes and that is what makes it all so fun! Art and Science are not two sides of a coin actually. That would imply that they are two disjoint sets which are a part of a one big set. No no no, that is not the case. It is more like... They are the same sets, occupying the same space and matter... Just placed in different dimensions which merge once in a while. Sherlock does not care whether the earth moves around the sun, or the moon around the earth and all that astronomical stuff. He only needs stuff which are important to his cases, his work. His head is his harddrive and he needs to delete unimportant stuff to make space for new input. Yet he looks up at seemingly unimportant constellations in wonder. This is the important bit. They won't help his case... (His exact words:)
I have always wondered what makes an Arts student different from a Science student. Well, generally people who take Arts have little or no interest in maths and... that is about it, really. The stupidest stereotype I have heard about Arts students is that they take up Arts because they are weak in academics and can't handle the sciences. A lot of Indian parents' do think so (thankfully not mine). But how wrong is that? The first thing people should realize is that the Arts stream can ensure quite a buck if you do well. But this "doing well" hurdle is supposed to be very high for Arts. Not everyone is cut out for it - is what most people believe. But it is the same with science. You will earn money only if you manage to "do well" in your exams and the work that follows. If you don't do well, then the principle applies - you are not cut out for it. We just tend to ignore such stuff when someone takes up the science stream. To be rich and famous using science is equally difficult as being rich and famous by arts. Both require talent and effort.
Science requires a creative mind. So does Arts. The main difference in these streams of academics is about how your creativity flows. Science wants you to follow a neat, methodical approach for you to work on it. You must have a reason for every step of yours. Every operation must be pre-defined before using it. If you manage a concrete theory out of it, nobody can question it. It is just the way it is.
When it comes to Arts, it is about how the general public look upon your piece of work. There are no concrete rules mapped out by someone which make your work a great piece of art. For example, you write a book. Some people will like it, some might find it average, some might find it subpar, others will hate it. You can never be sure. Such is the beauty! There is randomness at play here! Different people, different minds! Deciphering the order out of this chaos is nigh-on impossible. Here is the big difference in Science and Art. Your work in science, if it follows the set rules, then you get appreciation. In Art, there are no set rules! Kind of like fashion (which I know nothing about, by the way)... But I know this one adage about it: fashion keeps changing. Identifying the current fad is key while writing a book, or painting a picture, or making a movie. You need to know what people are after. As of recently, John Green books are being doled out in bookstores. About 6 months ago, you could barely find his books in large-scale bookstores. Now nearly every bookstore has collections and collections of his books. Just cashing up on the sudden popularity.
Nonetheless, just following the current fad every time is not going to help you every time. It just might be that whatever you are good at does not match up with it. But that is why being good at art, your work being liked by many different people is an achievement in itself. I doubt that all would like what you have done, but if majority do, that is still great.
In the end, Art and Science as two branches of study is completely paradoxical, in my opinion. Everything we study technically with logic and reasoning is termed as "Science". And well, defining Art is much tougher... more of an abstract concept, it is. But whatever you manage to do by instinct and imagination, when you have too many variables in place and the equation is possibly unsolvable by science, that is when Art comes in. It does kind of resemble number theory... Well, maths is not a science, not an art, it is something higher, anyway.
Whatever you do, never judge any science before studying it. Very thoroughly, at that. Every subject has its own charisma and secrets and paradoxes and that is what makes it all so fun! Art and Science are not two sides of a coin actually. That would imply that they are two disjoint sets which are a part of a one big set. No no no, that is not the case. It is more like... They are the same sets, occupying the same space and matter... Just placed in different dimensions which merge once in a while. Sherlock does not care whether the earth moves around the sun, or the moon around the earth and all that astronomical stuff. He only needs stuff which are important to his cases, his work. His head is his harddrive and he needs to delete unimportant stuff to make space for new input. Yet he looks up at seemingly unimportant constellations in wonder. This is the important bit. They won't help his case... (His exact words:)
But that doesn't mean I cannot appreciate it...
No comments:
Post a Comment