The question "What is xxx?" is a necessary platform for loads of eloquent theorists -- all of whom are deluded by the assumption that external-to-the-mind "categories" exist, and that every object either IS or ISN'T a member of a given alleged category no matter what any mind thinks. Expressed in Platonic terms, this error assumes that each object either has or has not (or "participates in") the required categorizing "quality" -- of "artness", "conceptual artness", "abstract artness", etc.
Many listers pay lip-service to this argument -- "Well, of course, everyone knows that, that's a dead horse" etc -- and in the next breath use the word 'art' in a way that betrays that they DO believe each object either IS or ISN'T "art", and either HAS or HAS NOT a never-defined (chimerical) quality/essence, "artness". (This delusion is prototypically exhibited in a story this week about Maurice Sendak, in which he took seriously the muddled question, "Is XXX an artist or merely an illustrator?") In a message dated 9/10/08 11:46:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > What is the best conceptual art? > > What a stupid question! No wonder nobody answered it. > > How can one concept be better than another? (unless in response to some > specific question or problem) > > This is yet another way in which conceptual art is different from all the > other arts -- and to include it within the category of art demolishes that > category except within some kind of institutional theory. > > ************** Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
