The Intentional Fallacy covers this issue. Thus I think it's only honest to say that artists often do less than they want to do, or even know how to do. Yet It is sometimes also the case that artists do much more than they thought they did or even wanted to do. A gap between the artist's coding of an artwork and the societal/historical coding of it is always present -- and always changing. Artists are limited to proposing; Saul's big discourse machine disposes. Round and round they go.
WC --- Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Following Cheerkep's suggestion -- I've tried > considering the image as > multiplex -- and I still can't think of any examples > of images made by people > who didn't know how to make them -- unless the > makers have reported that about > themselves. > > Michael has provided yet another example of a maker > rejecting her own work > (the student who accepts criticism in a class) - yet > as Michael also notes -- > some students do not - and consider their work to be > exactly what they want. > (it's only rarely that such work is celebrated, > - but it's rarely that any work gets celebrated) > > > I'm reminded of the story told by my personal artist > hero, Milton Horn, whose > drawing teacher at the Beaux Arts academy in New > York (80 years ago) began > humming the Chopin funeral march -- to indicate that > Milton was going to be > thrown out of class if he didn't start following > instructions and stop making > his figures so linear. (note: he never changed - and > he was thrown out) > > > And William reports something similar about himself > : "There is ALWAYS a gap > between what one wants and what one knows how to do > and between what one knows > how to do and what one does and between what one > wants > and what one wants after having done it." > > (Which is similar to how I feel about my own image > making: I never know how to > do what I want) > > And yet Saul, presumably, is still convinced that > such examples exist without > such self reporting -- and he can "demonstrate it > heuristically" > > And yet -- he hasn't -- has he ? - begging off a > reply by claiming that I am > such a "worthless" interlocutor. > > Well -- I'm sure I could be better -- but his > assertion - though seemingly > indefensible -- is a very important one in > contemporary culture -- because it > defines an approach toward arts education that seems > to be unique in world > history. > > I.e. -- usually teachers have asserted, in effect, > "We are going to teach > you how to do what we want" -- while the > contemporary art school asserts "We > are going to teach you how to do what you want" -- > which would require teachers to be mind readers - or > Marxist theorists like > Saul -- who know more about what you really want > than you do. > > It's a bizarre situation -- but isn't this what > William would call > "progressive" ? > _____________________________________________________________ > Click for free info on online doctorate degrees and > make up to $250k/ year. > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2211/fc/Ioyw6ijnWkkdRZcuvu5ygKf50cSRv9 > 3V9Fph4teK2GXnb7R01SK9HO/
