Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts but unfairly condemned in history? discuss regarding the arts and history.

The Arts and History as areas of knowledge, stand as pillars of human expression and inquiry, each with its own set of conventions and expectations. Within these separations, a curious duality emerges more specifically in the attitudes towards subjectivity. The fact that Art celebrates subjectivity while History condemns is attributable to these two fields' different purposes and methodologies. The term “subjectivity” can be defined as being based on or being influenced by factors such as personal feelings and opinions. The term “celebrated” can be defined as being admired, honored, or praised more specifically in the public eye. The phrase “unfairly condemned ” can be defined as a situation or piece of work that is judged unjustly.

Subjectivity is an essential component of the Arts, where it is frequently praised as an abundance of expression, creativity, and uniqueness. Subjectivity in the Arts is abundant because it gives artists room to show their unique perspectives as well as experiences without the restrictions of objective reality. However, in history, subjectivity is frequently looked down upon as a serious disadvantage, because of the danger it poses to objectivity and veracity.

In History, being objective is valued because it helps keep the past as unbiased as possible. In the realm of history as well as historical analysis, the interplay between subjectivity and objectivity is a constant source of debate. History is subjective. In some aspects, history is often criticized for its lack of objectivity. The famous phrase “history is written by the victors,” underscores this concern and highlights the notion that the perspectives and accounts of those in power often dominate the historical narratives. The phrase suggests that history is usually manipulated to serve the interests of the powerful which can even lead to a potential bias or even an incomplete portrayal of events. For example, A Cold War historian whose main focus is orthodox ie. placing all blame on the USSR without examining the contribution of the United States would be considered subjective due to their bias towards the United States.

Historians’ accounts are often considered objective records of the past however, they often face criticism for their lack of objectivity because of the subjective lens through which they are written.

A striking example that comes to light is the historian John Lewis Gaddis, a prominent American historian known for his expertise in Cold War history and grand strategy. He's often associated with the concept of "post-revisionism". Post-revisionism emerged as a historical analysis approach in terms of the Cold War context, it seeks a middle ground between traditionalist and revisionist perspectives. In the context of the question regarding subjectivity, Gaddis's work becomes applicable as he's been both praised and criticized for his interpretations regarding the role played by Reagan in bringing the Cold War to a close in the publication  “The Cold War: A New History”. Throughout the book, he portrays himself as an unabashed Reagan fan when he states that “Reagan was as skillful a politician as the nation had seen for many years and one of its sharpest grand strategists ever.” Which supports the thesis he followed in the book which was that the main reason for the Cold War ending was Reagan disregarding all other factors. He continues by stating that “His strength lay in his ability to see beyond complexity to simplicity.” In this he places Reagan on the highest pedestal in comparison to the other events that caused the Cold War to end and the soviet union to collapse. Gaddis’ praise to Reagan for ending the Cold War significantly differs from all the other historians who provide an account of this event (Inglis, 2011).

Despite the praise Gaddis has given, other historians view the role that he played in the ending of the Cold War as minimal and ineffective. Lou Cannon is a significant example. Writing his biography, Cannon indicates Reagan became president “notoriously ill-informed about foreign affairs”. He could only be taught on the issue by the use of movies. Robert McFarlane continues to elaborate on Reagan's in-effectiveness due to what he describes as a fundamentalist approach. To him, Reagan based his foreign policy and defense strategy on the premise that armageddon was imminent. McFarlane quotes Reagan's statement in 1971 that ‘everything is in place for the battle of Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.” which shows that Reagan's decision-making regarding strategic security and foreign affairs was based on religious zeal rather than factual calculations. Despite Gaddis’ praise, it shows that subjectivity in history does distort the objectivity that history is supposed to portray. Besides Lou going against the notion that Gaddis brings out there is also Rhodes who portrays Reagan as an ineffective leader who could not hold a conversation with the Soviet Union’s leader Mikhail Gorbachev unless he had his flashcards on cue, the portrayal of Reagan by Gaddis overwrites the actuality of his ineffectiveness and completely disregards the other factors and events that led to the end of the Cold War (Inglis, 2011).

History by its own nature cannot disregard subjective accounts as historians are always influenced by their own personal ideologies, religion, gender, race, and nationality. One of the six main concepts in history is perspectives which aren't always the same and differ from historian to historian because, at the end of the day, history has various interpretations of the same event. The facts and events will remain objective but the perspectives brought by historical accounts bring the aspect of subjectivity in history.

In Arts, subjectivity is seen through the expressions of personal perspective. The extent to which it is subjective is because different people have different preferences. In arts, the nature of subjectivity is used to explain the extent to which individuals react to a work of art. The creation of art is often surrounded by various factors which include; personal opinions, experiences, beliefs, and feelings rather than facts. The measure of beauty in arts may differ from person to person. For example, the judging of art forms an opinion on whether it is “good” or “bad” The critic can deem a body of work as good or bad due to personal influences. Art tastes are highly individual and will range from one critic or collector to the next (Benharrouche, 2022).

Subjectivity is rightfully celebrated in the arts as it allows for various perspectives that enhance the artist's creativity. “Comedian” is a striking example done by Maurizio Cattelan and released in 2019. The art piece consists of a fresh banana duct taped to a wall. The work is a conceptual work of art. Conceptual art means that the artist has released the art to appeal to the psychological processes rather than trying to appeal to the audience in terms of making it visually attractive.  The work is more subjective as it challenges traditional notions of art and invites the audience to engage and bring out their perspectives on the artwork. "Comedian" by Maurizio Cattelan is celebrated for initiating discussions about the fundamental nature of art, the artist's function, and its impact on the market. Viewers subjectively interpret the work, discovering humor, absurdity, or profundity in its simple composition. This celebration stems from the artwork's ability to tap into diverse perspectives in contemporary art, urging viewers to critically assess and reshape their perceptions of artistic expression and meaning.
 

Different people have different ways of judging art. Some critics can focus on specific forms of art and think they are ethereal however the other forms of art can be vile. This goes down to the subjectivity of art and the perspective to which they are regarded. This does not mean that art that is not suited for the critic is less worthy of praise as it is down to personal preference of art (Hayler, 2021).
 

However, it is important to note that art can still be objective. In the context of the prompt, the celebration of subjectivity in art is often the case as the critic's opinions are more swayed by their personal preference. Certain criteria have to be met which is the compositional elements of art for it to be considered art. The building blocks of art which include; technical accuracy, principles of design as well as socio-cultural acceptance bring out the objective nature that art does hold (Is Art Truly Subjective? The Debate Goes On… – Mariana Custodio, 2021).

I strongly believe there is a clear contrast in terms of the celebration of subjectivity in the arts and history. Art celebrates subjectivity because it has the capacity to evoke emotions, challenge social norms as well and to allow artists to showcase their emotions in a way that appeals to our visuals. It’s role in history remains a controversial topic, as it is often criticized for potentially distorting or creating a biased account regarding the historical accounts.

In conclusion, Arts and History are two diverse areas of knowledge each with its own peculiar set of conventions, and differ immensely in theory and practice. One endeavors objectivity and in the process abhors subjectivity without completely escaping its clutches as bias will always be part of the historian's craft. The other celebrates subjectivity as a pathway of allowing artists to freely express their creativity. That said, Art still has definitive objective criteria for what qualifies to be Art and what doesn't. Therefore, both Art and History while at opposite ends of the pendulum can never escape the aspects of objectivity and subjectivity respectively.

Benharrouche, Y. (2022, February 20). Is Art Subjective or Objective? - Eden Gallery.
EDEN Gallery. https://www.eden-gallery.com/news/is-art-subjective

Burger, N. (2023, June 20). Is Art Subjective? - Understanding Subjectivity in Art. Art in
Context. https://artincontext.org/is-art-subjective/

Hayler, K. (2021, June 29). Is Art Subjective? Is There Good and Bad Art? Wildlife Art
and Travel. https://www.wildlifeartstore.com/is-art-subjective/

Inglis, F. (2011, July 20). Review of “The Cold War: A New History” by John Lewis
Gaddis. Rhapsody in Books Weblog. https://shorturl.at/fnqI0

Is Art Truly Subjective? The Debate Goes On… – Mariana Custodio. (2021, June 28).

Mariana Custodio.
https://marianacustodio.com/is-art-truly-subjective-the-debate-goes-on/