So let's discuss the Peter Kivy book.
He writes philosophy, not journalism, and even if Cheerskeep has defaced the
pages with carping marginalia, at least that's the only book he mentioned in
response to a query about recommendations.
I'll order a copy this weekend.
The second page shares this important quote:
"one might say that a great deal of modern philosophy of art is an attempt to
come to a philosophical understanding of the productions of the avant-garde"
-- which promises to offer an historical approach that interests me.
*****************
>Still, I do frequently buy books by single authors. There's one that's been
on my shelf for a year or two that has an intriguing premise -- Peter Kivy's
"PHILOSOPHIES OF ARTS An Essay in Differences". Kivy was driven by the desire
to see what we might learn by focusing on the differences between the
so-called "arts" rather than working on a definition of "art" that selected
all and only the pursuits we tend call "arts". However, just now I picked it
up and I notice I read the first chapter right after I bought it, and
scribbled on various pages a fringe of carping marginalia. Kivy (like Lehrer,
though less so) does seem better equipped to talk about specific genres than
about philosophy of art.
____________________________________________________________
Workers Compensation Legal Advice. Click here
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc2zeRYXBhbBc9v01VaPV4XoCA
v8uOECXNISZ9eQyRU70jKtO/
