A Matter Of Interpretation.
Every time I go to the dentist I pass by these flowers. They’re plastic so they last but they’ve been there at least three years—I’ve written about it before—and someone regularly refreshes them, adding new ones and making other changes. There’s still no note, nothing to explain why they’re there, but I still assume they’re some kind of memorial. I still respect the privacy of whoever put them there. Even though it’s in a public spot their reasons for putting the flowers there are, I believe, personal, and should remain that way.
Still that got me thinking about how we interpret works of art. There’s a deep impulse to find meaning in things and it does seem obvious that if someone made something they had a purpose. At first I thought about how it applies to visual arts. Paintings and sculptures often get interpreted based on what we know about the artist and the time in which they lived, though titles can help too, and some artists are happy to explain their work. Others aren’t. Writing—both poetry and prose—can also have layers of meaning, and there are writers who are happy to talk about their inspiration, their craft, and whether there were deeper ideas they were trying to convey but didn’t state explicitly. And there are others who won’t do that. Cormac McCarthy regularly turned down often large fees to come and speak, saying anything readers wanted to know they could get from his books.
There’s an episode of Sanford & Son that opens with Fred and Lamont in a museum. The tour guide shows them an assemblage of metal pieces and asks, “What do you think the artist was trying to say?” Fred quips, “Stay off the freeway!”

Source: YouTube
It’s a joke and I still think it’s funny but even when I was a kid and saw that episode for the first time I thought, that could be right. My parents regularly took me to art museums, which I think is the source of my interest in art, and I learned pretty early that there’s no one way to interpret anything. Maybe that’s why I’ve remembered it and even as an adult think the assemblage could be interpreted as a statement about the perils of technology and the speed of modern life.
Fred is inspired to build an assemblage of his own, but it’s dismissed as worthless, not a “real” work of art, and he tears it down. Why? I wondered. As a kid I was often frustrated by sitcoms that seemed to get into something really interesting right as they hit the twenty-two minute mark and there’d be a quick, cheap resolution that reset everything just before the credits rolled. That still annoys me and I still ask questions like, why is an assemblage in a museum a valuable piece of art but one built by a junk dealer in a backyard worthless?
There’s no right answer to that question.