for the benefit of others The very concept art gives rise to its practices, practioners, and its products. The artist, therefore is not the creator of the concept but, inversely the concept creates the artist. In turn, we (the audience) come to know the collective content of the concept "art" through the objects we associate with it - the work of art is a revealing of the concept - not its embodiment - for art is in the mind not in the object. Consequently, the art-work(the object) is rightly or wrongly an artist's attempt at elaborating (coming to know the truth) of the concept Inversely, through these objects, we the audience are collectively and individually made aware of "the knowing of art" the body of knowledge (which can not be definitively known that is art's (this latter concept being is a kantian one).
f MH's arguments are tautological so as to reflects his belief that the circularity of our reality - which for him is an illusion behind which metaphysical truths dwell. MH itherefore seeks to demonstrate how self-reflective and analytic thought might emancipate us from the fallacies of this circularity by bringing us to an understanding of how language orders our reality and in turn deprives us of the essence of things. As for the Shoes - you may want to read Myer Shapiro's response to MH's reading fo them - I think you might find more satisfactory - and more to your taste ____________________________________________ Saul Ostrow | Visual Arts & Technologies Environment Chair, Sculpture Voice: 216-421-7927 | [email protected] | www.cia.edu<http://www.cia.edu/> The Cleveland Institute of Art | 11141 East Boulevard, Cleveland, OH 44106
