>Worringer defines this broadened notion of empathy as having two two impulses, abstraction and empathy. That's about it. The idea that the artwork is a container for projected subjectivity is probably the most established aesthetic view today, replacing the earlier, formalist idea that the art object contains independent "significant form". So now, what's your beef? ... WC
Where is the evidence to suggest that Worringer was presenting "a broadened notion of empathy as having two impulses, abstraction and empathy"? Nowhere does he say that Lee and Lipps' notion of empathy is more narrow than his , instead, he introduces another notion, "the tendency to abstraction" which "appears to us as the polar opposite of the need of empathy." (how more unequivocal could he get?) So, we're left with the problem of how one decides which abstractions serve better than others, in other words, how aesthetic choices can be made without any kind of kind of empathy at all. In the century that followed, we've seen that problem avoided by conflating aesthetic choice with either monetary investment (the shock and glitter world of Charles Saatchi) or art theory (Marxist, semiotic, whatever) , establishing a distinct, "contemporary artworld" where empathy is shunned, despised, and marginalized. That's my beef. ____________________________________________________________ Santa Rosa Bail Bonds Call Our Bail Bond Agency Today for Bail-Outs and Large Bail Bonds! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=IR942gwkmJINRRbAYqu1mQAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAUAAAAAAAAAAFZ9Lj4Oy05EUEm5af6OyBlyXr5OAAAAAA==
