Interesting. But do we really think artists like Van Gogh, Monet, Cezanne and so many others went through years of non-recognition or poverty or both just so some Sunday afternoon aesthete could feel a delicate pulse of 'aesthetic pleasure' and feel 'satisfied'.
Yuk! DA On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:08 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In a message dated 6/4/08 3:00:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >> 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? >> > Spoken like a true "non-artist", someone who has never had the experience of > creating the kinds of works most of us are devoted to. > > Critics, sociologists, moralists, leaders of "movements" -- they all would > tell creators what they "ought" to be doing, what their "purpose" should be, > what their "function" is. Luckily, worthy creative passion and satisfaction is > deaf to all that. > > > > ************** > Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with > Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. > (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?& > NCID=aolfod00030000000002) > > -- Derek Allan http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
