I am talking modernism as a movement of gradual innovations based on traditional struggle to create timeless Good- beauty. Those modernists can justify everything they are trying to do with the quality of work. You are talking about 'postmodern' institutions. They can justify anything, but beauty, because it is easy (creatively) and profitable, hope for a short while. It may be not popular on this list, but there are writers with good taste and knowledge at New Criterion then D. Kuspit, Perl and few others. Boris Shoshensky
-- "Chris Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Boris asks: "What 'modernism' you are talking about? This word is misused now-days as much as 'abstraction'." Boris, are there are any current writers/institutions that you would call modernist that address questions of why one should choose the "invigorating, encouraging, vital, comforting, wholesome and enjoyable" -- or the more basic questions of choosing good over evil or life over death ? Isn't this exclusively the domain of traditional religions? So even if some modernists, like William, have an interest in something they call *beauty* -- they can't justify it (as modernists) -- and if it does get cultivated within modernist institutions-- that cultivation is sporadic, accidental, and generally ineffective. ____________________________________________________________ Click to find moving companies, movers, van lines, and auto transport services. Low prices. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijm4qQ2emwM89RDkazaH8BY2z R6GvrmL5Ehk5MElCklby2WoM/ _____________________________________________________________ Click to find local singles for dating, romance and fun. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4ucIWs2Ga58GP4NaPqjGhGm3 YOaEAUtnlfsXwJ79Qe8LvJEQ/?count=1234567890
