A curator's choice can only reflect the broadness of his expertise.
Curators are not recording machines without biases. No one is.
Subjectiveness is what keeps art alive / evasive/ and unteachable.
Good ,better,and best are all unprovable biased illusions in art.
mando
On Nov 15, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Chris Miller wrote:
If one becomes a curator, the work invariably reflects the one's
personal
taste. The expertise quality only means that the choices they may
make are
broader between two aesthetically subjective points, what do you
think?
(Mando)
"Broader" is one issue, and it's an important one. (though it's also
difficult, since "broadness" cannot be all inclusive)
But youbre forgetting how concerned youbve been about the
difference
between b chicken and rabbitb Isnbt the ability to make that
distinction
one criterion of expertise that is very important to you?
Another might be experience. Could a person who has never been to
an art
museum possibly qualify as an art expert? Or a person who could
not tell
sort paintings by the century in which they were made?
Youbve conflated expertise with unanimity of opinion, and that
doesnbt
happen even in the sciences.
So you won't allow that one subjective opinion might be better than
another,
and you've ended up with Michael, despairing of the entire project
of vetting
experts, which admittedly is complex and difficult.
But if you like to see other peoplebs art (possibly you donbt?),
youbve
got be concerned with who is screening what will be available for
you, and the
rest of the public, to see.
Therebs something defeatist about an artist who doesnbt care
about that,
and I canbt believe you felt that way when you were beginning your
studies.
____________________________________________________________
Weight Loss Program
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?
cp=Am77YyqjNBH8AizhveD_yQAAJz6c
l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAA
A=
