On Nov 3, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Saul Ostrow wrote: > the signifier is always more or less then the signified - and the > signified is > always more or less then the signifer because the two are of a > different order > and each accrues to their selves differences that by necessity > cause a miss > alignment - the successful work of art takes this into account and > attempts to > curtail the surplus by creating correlations rather than simple > equivalencies > > ____________________________________________ > Saul Ostrow | Visual Arts & Technologies Environment Chair, Sculpture > Voice: 216-421-7927 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cia.edu/ > The Cleveland Institute of Art | 11141 East Boulevard, Cleveland, > OH 44106 > > > ________________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 2:40 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Certainty" > > In a message dated 11/1/08 10:26:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mando wrote: >> Is fuzziness a certainty in art? > I'm not sure what you mean. One interpretation might be this: "When > a creator > produces a work, is it always the case that what arises in a > contemplator's > mind will be to some degree different from what was in the > creator's mind?" I > say yes -- to some degree, always. Yes ,I believe that is always the case mando > If what you meant is, "When someone contemplates a work, will the > notion that > arises in his mind always be to some degree indeterminate, > indefinite, and > unstable?" Again -- yes. Yes again, because the contemplator's mind contemplates by his own sense of understanding > Or you may say, "I'm not talking about notions in anybody's minds. I'm > talking about fuzziness IN THE WORK." I'm not sure what to cite as > "fuzziness in awork", as distinguished from fuzziness in the notion > occasioned > by contemplating the work. The essence of one's work can only be a fuzzy notion of the essence, impossible to duplicate. Or one may add preferred fuzziness by choice . > And certainly what one just might possibly want to stipulate is > fuzziness > IN a Beethoven sonata would be different from that in a Wallace > Stevens poem, or a Pinter play, or a Robert Altman movie or a Rothko > painting. Yes, fuzziness in music, sculpture ,painting,etc. means different things. I can't think of a better word,,,,,, not being word person. > Note: If we're talking about fuzziness IN THE WORK as > distinguished from in > anyone's NOTION, this is not an instance when "fuzzy FOR/TO WHOM" > applies. I don't know what you mean, But fuzzy is different from individual to individual, but on occasion almost similar, but never the same. > > It's also possible someone might argue there can be no such thing as > fuzziness in, say, a fixed painting. Every line, every drop of > paint, is > determinate,definite, and stable -- even though they are all > multiplex. > Besides: >> Consider: > We should never ask how many parts a thing has, because "parts" are > arbitrary stipulates: How many "parts" does your face have?" There is fuzziness even in a rock. My face has as many parts as there perceivers. O mando > > > > ************** > Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot > 5 Travel Deals! > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212416248x1200771803/aol? > redir=http > ://travel.aol.com/discount-travel?ncid=emlcntustrav00000001)
