he had often experienced it himself, as a spectator, particularly in relation to lite

[keannu]

I'm sorry this might need a technical knowledge about Van Gogh. Do you happen to know what he experienced in relation to literature as a spectator?

is34
ex)Van Gogh lived in Arles until May 1889, fifteen months during which he produced approximately two hundred paintings, a hundred drawings...Later, explaining to his brother why he had moved from Paris to Arles, Van Gogh offered two reasons; because he wanted to 'paint the South' and because he wanted, through his work, to help other people to 'see' it. However unsure he might be of his own powers to achieve that, he never wavered in his faith that the project was theoretically possible- that is, that artists could paint a portion of the world and in consequence open the eyes of others to it. If he had such faith in the eye-opening power of art, it was because he had often experienced it himself, as a spectator, particularly in relation to literature.

 

[emsr2d2]

I Googled "Van Gogh's relationship with literature" and this was the first hit. It looks like it might be what you need: Van Gogh Museum - Van Gogh's Literary Sources

 

[keannu]

Thanks a lot! I read the writing, and it says he had great love for literature. But the fact alone is not enough to understand the underlined. Does "it" mean "the eye-opening power of art" not "eye-opening power of literature"? What does it mean to experience such power as a spectator? Did he read some writing to realize such power from an objective point of view(spectator)?

ex) If he had such faith in the eye-opening power of art, it was because he had often experienced it himself, as a spectator, particularly in relation to literature.

 

[emsr2d2]

Do you not consider literature to be a form of art?

 

[keannu]

It makes sense. Yes literature seems to be a part of art. Then, what does "spectator" mean in there?

 

[emsr2d2]

Well, van Gogh was not a writer, he was a painter, so although a part of the "arts" scene, he could only really have a relationship with literature from the outside making him, effectively, a spectator. One is usually either a spectator or a participant.

 

[konungursvia]

Someone who enjoys watching, but doesn't participate (he was never a writer).

It makes sense. Yes literature seems to be a part of art. Then, what does "spectator" mean in there?