Styles are the accident and by no means the essence of art; the free man is not trying to express himself, but that which was to be expressed.

Styles are the accident and by no means the essence of art; the free man is not trying to express himself, but that which was to be expressed. Our conception of art as essentially the expression of a personality, our whole view of genius, our impertinent curiosities about the artist’s private life, all these things are the products of a perverted individualism and prevent our understanding of the nature of medieval and oriental art.

 

The modern mania for attribution is the expression of Renaissance conceit and nineteenth century humanism; it has nothing to do with the nature of medieval art, and becomes a pathetic fallacy when applied to it.

 

In all respects the traditional artist devotes himself to the good of the work to be done. The operation is a rite, the celebrant neither intentionally nor even consciously expressing himself.

 

It is by no accident of time, but in accordance with a governing concept of the meaning of life, that works of traditional art, whether Christian, Oriental or folk art, are hardly ever signed: the artist is anonymous, or if a name has survived, we know little or nothing of the man. This is true as much for literary as for plastic artifacts. In traditional arts it is never Who said? but only What was said? that concerns us: for “all that is true, by whomsoever it has been said, has its origin in the Spirit.”

 

--------

 

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy: The Christian and Oriental, or True, Philosophy of Art

 

Done