Julian Johnson

“As any painter, writer, or
composer knows, artworks arise from the tension between their physical
materials and the thought or spirit that shapes them from within. Though
they require some outward, physical element, they cease to function as art
when they are reduced to their objectlike, artifactual element. This definitive tension underlies art’s varied social uses and explains how it came to
be celebrated on the one hand as an expression of the highest spiritual
achievements of humanity and, on the other, criticized as merely another
precious object—a trapping of wealth, privilege, and social exclusion.
Even in the heyday of classical music, there was always a gap between the
philosophical claims for music and social practice”
― Julian Johnson, Who Needs Classical Music?: Cultural Choice and Musical Value

“There is no inherent value in simply surrounding oneself with great music and art; what matters is the degree of exposure one is prepared to give, accompanied by the going out of the receptive mind, the active encounter with the object. The fetishism of art objects has not helped art’s cause at all. Attributing value to the object rather than the encounter underlies the arrogant dismissal of so many works. “If I don’t get it, it’s no good” is a mind-set that will never understand art because it fails to understand that art requires a humility and patience in the face of the object—and not mere passivity either, but an active opening of our responses.”
― Julian Johnson, Who Needs Classical Music?: Cultural Choice and Musical Value