>>"If someone is making a work that unconceals the true essence of something,that person is making art"
>It's the same as looking or thinking of a chair and drawing a large rock. I agree. That"s what I've always done, because it's our only choice. mando But if your drawing does not unconceal the "true essence" of some identifiable thing, then you haven't made a work of art, Mando -- at least, according to Heidegger. And since art is logical, there is only one true essence for everything (even for Mando) : if A does not equal B, then the essence of A does not equal the essence of B. This is especially problematic for a painter like William who intends to make that which appears meaningless. I doubt that Heidegger would hold that intention against him, but he would only consider William an artist if he failed to achieve it. Heidegger is something of an imperialist. In any period of time, there is one, and only one set of true essences -- there are no exceptions for cultural diversity. (just as there weren't in the great totalitarian states of the 20th C.) The contemporary artworld is the same way. It will only recognize artists from China or India if those artists have abandoned their own traditions and are presenting the tropes of contemporary art. (the public art now in Millennium Park, Chicago, is a fine example - from Anish Kapoor's bean to the hot new Chinese sculptors now on temporary display.) ____________________________________________________________ Click for free information on top investing websites and services. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxQyrrZI48KKCoUZ853CjpaFK DQDsVtTAibqtWk3M0TxxyViKKa6re/
