How typically Derek One asks him which African art he is talking about and how by what terms is it to be called "art" and its okay let's drop the subject - you may not like my question but you should at least try to respond to Imago's given it is the same question in depth - but then again, that's the problem you don't seem to know much about your subject
Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies The Cleveland Institute of Art > From: Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:36:58 +1000 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Presence > > This reply is so typically Saul. 'Don't worry about the facts. Just > trot out the knee-jerk ideological answer.' > > At least Imago's reply showed some thought. You do need to read some > more art history though, Imago. In fact more history generally. > > But I am going to drop the issue. Too much to explain, too little > time, and an audience - with the possible exception of Cheerskep - > with too little interest in approaching the question with an open > mind. And on top of that, too much unpleasantness. It's making me > reply in the same vein and that's just a silly waste of time. > > As I said to Imago, some of the stuff on my website discusses aspects > of the question. Eventually, there will be more to come... . > > DA > http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Saul Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Let us begin with a definition of all "African >>> art" which with the exception of contemporary art being made by African >> artists is from my view is a western neo colonial construction meant to >> universalize the Western notion of art and culture >> >> > > > > -- > Derek Allan > http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean.
