Michael has asked a number of good questions - which I will now attempt to answer:
>Aside from subjecting people to various tests, Miller hasn't ever explained exactly how a truly sensitive person, standing before the great works and exposing himself to the highest art, learns. How does this person discern mere virtuosity (which beguiled the mentor-less William) from genius or true artistic accomplishment? Besides, of course, being suffused in the Bava Ray. I think of each work of the imagination as a kind of train ride -- and all that the traveler can do is try to get on board -- stay on board -- look out the windows -- and after the trip is over, judge how good it was. The more successful trips you've taken, the better that judgment can be. Think of the mentor -- as a kind of personalized tour guide (i.e. pre-recorded tapes are not going to cut it) >Miller has never explained how anyone gets from ignorant to knowledgeable without going through a process that is, inevitably, either (a) a one-on-one relationship with a guide or instructor (a very labor-intensive arrangement, and the mentee* is stuck with a dilemma if the mentor proves to be incompetent or ineffective); or (b), institutional. Some people do appear to get from ignorant to knowledgeable in some subject or practice without a specific, identifiable mentor. But even then -- you would probably find that this person was mentored in how to be self taught -- ie. the person might have had very effective parents. Institutions may offer one-on-one mentoring -- but if they don't -- why not just study on your own? Even William has claimed that he was mentored (by actual people, not just the paintings of Van Gogh) . One internet bio says that he was mentored by Elaine De Kooning, another one gives the credit to Raymond Jonson. >Basically, Miller is not against the *institutions of art*, per se, but merely against the prevailing theories now being taught in most of the art departments. Yes -- exactly. I've seen the results -- and they're terrible - not just in the classical genres that most interest me -- but in the modern genres as well. They are ideologically opposed to transmitting a tradition - any tradition -- and so they serve other social functions. > What do you do, not even best, but merely, well, just good? Nothing that I do satisfies me -- but actually, I do have a new gig -- as one of the art critics for Newcity, one of Chicago's free weekly newspapers. I've published about 15 reviews in there so far -- but since there are several writers, I never have to discuss things I don't like. ____________________________________________________________ Click for online loan, fast & no lender fee, approval today http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc1k17alh50jf1LMBYB2keHxeu 4ZGWRJ3KSy3vIrI48mwRucs/
