Re Egyptian art, Worringer was commenting on the standard distinction of his time (and later) between the Pharonic, highly stylized imagery and the imagery made for lesser nobility which tended to be more naturalistic, or at least far less rigidly stylized. Good examples are on display at the Oriental Institute, particularly dating from the Middle Kingdom era. Worringer was questioning that canon. abstraction, he said was as natural to human expression as imitation, and both existed side by side, as in E. art. His comments had very little to do with "abstract art" and everything to do with "abstraction". Try to hold that thought long enough to at least get the gist of it.
I don't understand your truly baffling and opaque phrase, "stonewall and bluff" re Worringer, as if you have any credible authority to judge his work. Your comment provides no access to Worringer or to your own mystical reasoning. But when I realize that you're only trying to depreciate those who take him at face value, to make them out as dupes of the educational system and as fools who actually read and make art, I know your agenda. If you had had an education you might have learned that it is more convincing to examine arguments on their merits, within the proper context, than it is to make up ignorant and foolish remarks about them, especially when you are pretending to reveal obvious flaws, even when learned scholars over the past century have not mentioned them. Another promising discussion has floundered on Miller's hostile reefs. wc ________________________________ From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:58:48 AM Subject: Re: Worringer and his predecessors >Not me. Why don't you go ahead with your own speculation? (regarding what "contradicts the supposition that this impulse of empathy was effective in the creators of the pyramidal form..") WC I speculate that Worringer recognized that the Lipps-Lee notions of empathy might just as well be applied to the creation and enjoyment of "abstract art", so all he could do was bluff and stone-wall his way around that problem. (though only a lazy reader, or dumb-ass art student, would let him get away with it) It's probably worth it to get the entire 168 page edition that is now available to see how he expands on his discussion of ancient Egypt, which seems to have interested him very much. (has anyone here got a copy?) In the excerpt found in Rader, Worringer proposes that there were two kinds of Egyptian art that developed side-by-side: "the imitative instinct" (like the well-known statue, "The Scribe") and the "artistic impulse" (which resulted in "true art"). It would have to be fascinating (or at least humorous) to discover which was which, according to his understanding of things. I have the terrible feeling that most of my favorite relics from Ancient Egypt are going to be demoted from "true art" status. While, I'm also wondering just what, other than the pyramids, he would allow into that lofty category. ____________________________________________________________ A surveyor available No need to look high and low for a professional service. Contact Barnfields in Enfield for a surveyo http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=OElMIl1edA64CKDyYpDPcwAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAUAAAAAAAAAAHBflz4ZM3tjfgShLjbjo9Z9DjCIAAAAAA==
