My views about the art object as a make-believe surrogate of self and feeling
are pretty well available in the site archives and on various sites on google
and elsewhere in published and unpublished writings in the Archives of
American Art, The Northwestern Univ. Library Archives and who knows where
else.   I think they parallel what the empathy and abstraction argument says
and to an extent also the earlier empathy views, giving ample consideration
for 100 years of new art, cognitive science, and philosophy, criticism, etc.
I'm not going to review it all for your here.  You, as a critic and all around
art adventurer, can sort it all out with good research and insight. Good
luck.
wc

--- On Sat, 7/18/09, Chris Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Chris Miller <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Worringer and his predecessors
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Saturday, July 18, 2009, 11:39 AM
> I asked William:
>
>
> >>How would you define 'empathy' when you assert that
> "it's not the majority
> case that contemporary art is antagonistic to empathy"?
>
> to which William replied:
>
> >Because the prevailing view is that objects do not
> express feeling but are
> instead make-believe surrogates of feeling.
>
>                
>                
>             ***********
>
> What a puzzlement.
>
> Is that distinction supposed to explain how your notion of
> 'empathy' differs
> from that of  Lee, Lipps, and Worringer ?
>
> Did they ever mention the "expression of feeling" at all in
> the excerpts that
> were provided by Rader? (wasn't their discussion
> exclusively about the
> response to, rather than the creation of, aesthetic objects
> ?)
>
> And, if you are willing to speak on behalf of the
> "prevailing view", could you
> tell us whether it believes that feelings can ever be
> expressed? (by
> screaming, talking, singing,dancing, whatever
> )   Does it believe that all
> expressions are make-believe, i.e., none of them are
> considered  true by the
> person who is doing the expressing?
>
> (it's so difficult to have a discussion with Mr. Prevailing
> View himself,
> because he's never around to offer any explanations. And
> yet he seems to be
> omnipresent and demanding conformity to his POV)
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Easy-to-use, advanced features, flexible phone
> systems.  Click here for more
> info.
>
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxcAB3vjluTKfNyOdvNFKkSQG
> zKglUjKgWvkzpTImQMNQVzCz8JvqA/

Reply via email to