Since I ended my last post with "either you see it or you don't", Imago
Asthetik is quite correct to bring our dialogue to a close.

But I still would like to respond to the below  - by noting that even if
"artworks explode into ones consciousness with a certain instantaneity",
.our self-verbalized responses are sequential (or at least mine are.   I can
only speak to myself with one voice at a time)

One of those verbalized responses might be "thanks to a certain text I read, I
am changing my way of looking at this art" -- and I'd like to know when and
where this thought arose.

And in addition, how widely you might now consider that it applies. (for
example,  does Mr. Ostrow think that "internal organization" is worthy of
query in Manet as well as Rubens?)

An entire branch of the educational industry is built upon the importance of
this notion, so I think it deserves some serious attention.




>I cannot speak for Mr Ostrow, but in my case it is only because I do not
find there to be much of interest in such a description.  Mr Conger or Mr
Brady, I believe, wrote that artworks explode into ones consciousness with a
certain instantaneity that does not allow the kind of narrativization (this,
and then THIS, AND THEN THIS, etc) you keep asking after.


____________________________________________________________
Easy-to-use, advanced features, flexible phone systems.  Click here for more
info.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxcAB3nqQs7UE33e0RlG0VhnT
2UkHkBPiA5VuQcm3JB8fRcW4WUwc4/

Reply via email to