>Haslick demonstrates simplistic flat thinking. Bell is more sophisticated. (Boris)
The only difference is that Bell admits his occasional failure, as sometimes when he is "tired or perplexed", he let's "slip my sense of form". Presumably, at other times, he is is successful in keeping his attention riveted "simply and solely of forms and their artistic combination" It's amusing - or sad -- to think of that poor man trying so diligently to avoid any "ideas of life" while auditioning a concert - as it is to think of a painter who heroically strives to make his work appear meaningless. As Kivy writes, such formalism is a reductio ad absurdum of itself -- or, as I would say, a reductio ad absurdum of the observation that subject matter can be considered irrelevant to the distinction between good art and everything else. Such an observation could have been made at any time and place where one statue of the XXX is chosen over many others which are thrown out, even though their subject matter could be called identical. But it's especially unavoidable in modern times when visiting an encyclopedic art museum and enjoying a variety of images whose intended subject matter is sometimes not known and usually not important. (Do I really care if this is a statue of Mithros or not?) ____________________________________________________________ Save big on quality, name brand carpets. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxYPYXomvNN0LdksiHdf09c99 FvD7cgKjZC0oaWUNZRmXSCJqoJpM8/
