So calling it art is of no value to because the thing called art has
no utility or use function

Sent from my iPhone
646 528 8537

On 2009-07-08, at 12:56 PM, "Michael Brady"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Saul Ostrow wrote:
>
>> Given your process does the determination art not art much matter -
>> if the answer is no then why sustain this categorical
>> differentiation - if yes, then what symbolic value does it imbue
>> that object with
>
> This is the second time you've use the term "symbolic value": I'm not
> sure what you have in mind. I don't think of a work of art
> "symbolically," either as (a) some coded arrangement where, e.g.,
> yellow symbolizes X or a horse symbolizes Y; or (b) a more general
> infusing of other feelings or qualities, e.g., a painting symbolizes
> the aspirations of the human soul for Z.
>
> The determination is NOT "art-not art." The determination is "true -
> not applicable." Then I can bring any constructs, frames,
> formulations, etc. about art and aesthetics or about utility to the
> contemplation of it. You seem to be stuck thinking I am judging "art-
> not art" first, but that's not what I'm doing.
>
>> - that is in surplus to your enjoyment of coming to know it both
>> experientially and exponentially textually
>
>
> I don't understand what you mean by the last two words. I will say
> that I don't turn to art, either viewing it or making it, to get
> enjoyment from doing so. I do, in fact, enjoy both making and looking
> at art, but I do it for other reasons and motivations, and enjoyment
> is just a corollary result, a collateral benefit.
>
> Again, to be clear, I enjoy visiting museums and galleries and talking
> about art or writing about it (as here, on this list). A lot of that
> enjoyment comes from the social activity. In fact, I may not like
> specific pieces and so not enjoy seeing them. I derive other pleasures
> directly from making and doing. Enjoyment comes later, and it is a
> catch-all term that includes those other pleasures.
>
>
>
>
> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Michael Brady
> [email protected]
> http://considerthepreposition.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to