Shaw has already made it clear that he is not going to tell us what "people
OUGHT to call 'art' because they ARE art."
(so don't worry, Kate, he's not going to categorically exclude abstract art or
anything else)
And what about the definition of a word like "money", Cheerskep ? Would you
expect the definers to indicate a selection of works -- or would they just
have to define some kind of process ?
***************
>I hope Shaw describes his notion of "define". Most "definitions" are
constructed after the definer indicates a selection of works. The works are
either samples of what people already call art, and the definer is trying to
cite a common element in all of them that prompts people to call all of them
"xxxx". Or they are a selection of works the definer feels people OUGHT to
call 'art' because they ARE art.
Which implies that I hope Shaw specifies a useful number of items in his
selection -- and also that he considers a selection of items that are
controversial.
____________________________________________________________
Click to find high quality stock photos and images.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc0u72YXRavP2qFQYbAIvTSVgA
C5rYgnvPHjGepr5NczqhnQw/
