Since my proposals re Manet's "implicit" perspective in The Bar at The Folies Bergere are published, it's appropriate to examine them and my descriptions, before denouncing my approach out of hand. There might be points of contention, as with DeDuve (who at least had the courtesy to explain his view in Critical Inquiry) and my rebuttal to him (also in Critical Inquiry) and James Elkin's contribution (also in Critical Inquiry) and Mary Gedo's observations, with my contributions, in her book, Looking At Art From the Inside Out, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994, pp. 1-53.
It's just plain out and out irresponsible to make pointless and ignorant comments about my and others vetted scholarly contributions as Miller loves to do, without going to the texts -- the painting at issue, and the published commentary. Frankly, I would truly welcome further analysis of that painting. As DeDuve himself so aptly said re modern art, "The jury is always still out". Intelligent, informed conversation is a delight and little else offers as much pleasure, especially when an honest effort is being made to to find points of reasoned agreement. Until then it's a total waste of time to bother with anything Miller says on this topic. I'll go to my studio now, and I'll imagine Manet to be there with me, gregarious, generous, intelligent. Maybe we'll finish a painting together. wc l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAAA=
