So William, would you rather have us read Barbara Stafford's "Echo Objects" ?
Allegedly, it "argues vigorously for a new understanding of images: one that
regards them not simply as products of mental operations but as constitutive
of such operations and cognitive processes."
I'm not thrilled about such an argument. Is it anything more than common sense
to recognize that images are often part of a thinking process ? But if you
think it's an important book -- please go ahead and present/attack/defend the
ideas in chapter one.
Perhaps, unlike the Lehrer book, someone will actually take us into chapter 2
and I'll get interested enough to order a copy (whether I respect you or not)
Does anyone here really read books - start to finish - solely on the basis of
a recommendation by someone they respect ?
I began reading "Dream of Red Chamber" on the recommendation of Madame Mao
(one of the most despicable characters in world history) -- but I only stayed
with it - for multiple readings - because I couldn't put it down.
*************
Well, I'm certainly glad to hear that Miller is interested in an historical
approach to modernism. He's never shown any interest before in the historical
underpinnings of modernism.
I'm all for the art philosophers, but few actually know anything about
modernist art and it's not all their fault. In academia, the philosophy and
art history departments are seldom interconnected, they're usually alienated,
and of course art practice departments are usually, unfortunately, estranged
from the other two. What that means is that in actual practice each discipline
has its own methodologies and debates.
Strange that Miller should dengrate Lehrer as a journalist (that he is) and
imply that a philosopher anthologist has done better at something Lehrer never
aimed to do anyway. Every author has his or her audience and whenever Miller
encounters a professional specialized audience he complains of their elitism;
now he complains about when he encounters an author who aims at a general
educated audience.
The real point here is an embarrassing absence of respect the listers have for
one another. I think Lehrer is denounced because I suggested the book,
although it was Michael who suggested an online debate.
I remain unconvinced that some of our wise listers have any awareness of what
is going on in neurology these days and how it impacts art and art
philosophy.
As Galileo learned, some folks just won't look through that telescope for fear
they'll need to admit something they feel they must deny to maintain their
dogma. Lerher offered a quick appreciation of the new science through the
intuitive insights of earlier artists. I've certainly suggested other, heavier
books, on the same topics to stony-cold silence: Barbara Stafford among
them.
____________________________________________________________
Get educated. Click here for Adult Education programs.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc147JSFWPEef0WSuoCovMKCaU
gPXQ3g1CFj3wJTNL6wm6yQs/
