The idea that popular arts were shallow by definition and the traditional arts were profound was dead, I thought, and I wanted to prove it.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The arts, as a reflection of human existence at its highest, have always and spontaneously lived up to this demand of plenitude. No mature style of art in any culture has ever been simple.
Once, the arts were opera, ballet, classical music, and everything else deemed highbrow.
The concept that an artist would be revered by popular culture is an immediate dismissal of his relevance as an artist.
There arose a belief in style - and in banality. Banality encompassed politics, too, because it was a common belief that politics were not worthy of art.
I think whatever art form you're in, whether TV, film or theater, you should know the history of who came before you and how the art form has changed or not changed and to learn from the greats.
We believed that there's no such thing as good art or bad art. Art is art. If it's bad, it's something else. It was a much, much harder line in the '50s and '60s than it is now, because the idea of art education didn't exist - they didn't have a fine arts program when I was a kid.
Popular art is the dream of society; it does not examine itself.
Art cannot be looked at as an elite, sacred event anymore. It has to be embraced as an accessible, popular form, which is what I believe theater is at its roots.
And the fifteenth century was an impassioned age, so ardent and serious in its pursuit of art that it consecrated everything with which art had to ad as a religious object.
I think that high art reposes on popular art, without one there cannot be another.