“Sometimes lies are more dependable than the truth.” – Orson Scott Card
A true artist utilizes lying to communicate truth. The debate on feeling “truth” when viewing a work of art is an argument on the means to achieving a goal. What is the goal of an artist? An artist must express an emotion, an idea, a thought, etc. using a medium of their preference. For example, imagine a war veteran giving an anecdote to an audience on the first time he was required use a firearm. His goal is to simulate and evoke the emotions he felt during that moment of his life. Yes, it is possible for the man to describe the past event as it actually happened and to tell “the truth.” But sometimes, this truth isn’t good enough. If he were to describe the event as it actually happened, he would fail to make the audience feel the same emotions that he once experienced. Therefore, he exaggerates many aspects of his story when talking to the audience. He might even make up a few aspects of the story altogether. He lies in order to effectively communicate his emotions to the audience; he “lies” to tell “the truth.”
Thus, what is truth? Is it the image of fading sunlight over a river seen in a painting? Or is it the raw emotion that the artist wanted to communicate to the viewer? Perhaps the artist saw a waterfall and felt that the emotions would be better translated to the viewer if he had painted a sunset instead. Indeed, the artist would be lying, but he would also be telling the truth. I believe that whenever I view a piece of art, indeed, I am seeing a lie. But when I view the artwork and am able to conjure the same emotion that the artist intended me to feel, I am feeling the truth.
