I think the idea that art 'satisfies' is silly anyway. It is linked to
the idea that art exists merely to be a source of 'pleasure'. Who but
the stereotype 'aesthete' thinks that any longer?

DA

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One reason why this topic is so difficult to discuss --- is that it's usually
> not clear just who is being satisfied.
>
> So... when William writes:
>
> "I think the aesthetic rush one gets from "abstraction" etc etc"---
> we might wonder -- to which *one* is he referring ?
>
> Himself ?
>
> Anyone ?
>
>
> Or --- one who is especially perceptive/sensitive/well-educated/whatever ?
>
>
> No one really wants to focus on her own, personal satisfaction -- because, how
> solipsistic is that! (although -- I wish more posters would -- since I find
> that sort of the comment to often be the most valuable)
>
> And no one here can claim any expertise in sociological or psychological
> research -- so we're not really qualified to comment on what most people or
> any people are feeling.
>
> But -- it's also quite problematic to stick one's neck out -- and make
> assertions about what the best feelers should be feeling. How arrogant is
> that!
>
> And so - the best strategy is to avoid all three approaches -- by conflating
> them all at once.
>
>
>                     ****
>
> And now -- for your entertainment -- I offer this journalistic response to
> "abstract art" -- from back in the day (1915) when it was considered new
> rather than canonically approved:  (the writer is Gene Morgan, of the Chicago
> Daily News)
>
>
> "Imagine a picture which looks like nothing, yet everything, and which is
> entitled "Michigan Avenue between Adams Street and 5 O'clock" At first glance
> you might think it was a soup can in a heavy blizzard.  A second glance would
> almost convince you that it was J.P.McEvoy's new car embracing a barber's pole
> with its front wheels.
>
> You see, you can never tell what a futurist painting represents. Thats where
> the fun comes in.
>
> Generally, it represents its title like a congressman represents his
> consitits.
>
> A futurist painting presents not ideas, but thought harmonies, soul tones and
> notes sounded by the vibrant emotions (It isn't every day you read stuff like
> that)
>
> The harmonies conveyed by these paintings are various.  Each painting is an
> orchestra in itself.
>
> One picture may be entitled "Golf Lynx calling its mate"  You look at the
> picture and then you think you're hearing a fife and drum corps passing a
> sawmill.
>
> Another painting is named "The Furniture Mover's Lament". You don't see any
> furniture, but you think you hear a piano being assaulted by a cabaret artist
> who has just been fed meat.  Still another masterpiece in a gold frame is
> entitled "Silent prayer" It looks like a big squidge of yellow paint, but it
> listens like a circus band leading the second
> division of the parade, with the steam calliope whistling for coal around the
> corner."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Planning for retirement? Click for free information on 401(k) plans.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijlfGveDCakIGXU3ApLuo6ZQX
> sRQYauz5u40IfP8lrOyRy3eE/
>
>



-- 
Derek Allan
http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm

Reply via email to