Is art more meaningful/powerful when inspired by real life?

Question

i dont know what to say about this question and i need to detail it so can someone help me out please? and thank you :)

Answer 1

Look, the meaning of any work of art lies in the individual.  If I watch a movie and get one meaning, and you watch it and get another, who here has the right to declare whose meaning is superior?  I say, no one.

Watch the movie "A Clockwork Orange."  Alex is a brutal, subhuman punk, but he listens to Beethoven avidly.  This icon of intelligent music, in Alex's mind, provides a musical score that perfectly supports his rapes and criminal assaults.

So, who cares what inspires the art?  Mickey Spillane was inspired by nothing but money, yet millions were inspired by his Mike Hammer novels.  Blake was inspired by his mystical visions of God.  Roger Waters (Pink Floyd) was inspired by his own life.  Salvador Dali was inspired by dreams and Freudian interpretations.  Claude Monet was inspired by light and air.  Inspiration comes from everywhere; what a work of art means to an audience is not directly dependent on the artist's inspiration.

That said, there is a certain correlation between the consummatory rhythms of an artist's creation and similar consummatory rhythms in the audience's experience (John Dewey), but that's a bit beyond the scope of this question.