In a message dated 3/4/10 8:22:45 PM, [email protected] writes:

>       I happen to agree that Miller should not be tossed off the list. 
> Free speech and all that.  It's just that I can't deal with his outlook
> anymore and would prefer a list that is more attuned to cooperative
> intellectual discussion instead of using a faux discussion as a vehicle to
insult and
> ridicule others and what they seem to represent.  Without me (his targeted
> symbol for contemporary art, art professors, museums, the art meritocracy
> and class bias, and so much more) his commentaries may reveal something more
> interesting. I admit I see him as the Glenn Beck of art and aesthetics.  
>

> Nonsense. This is not about free speech and Miller's right to it, it is
> about basic manners. No manners,   no list "more attuned to cooperative
inte
> llectual discussion instead of using a faux discussion as a vehicle to
> insult and ridicule others and what they seem to represent."   I don't
actually
> care if Miller wants to be a proletarian neighborhood intellectual and
> cling to his view that the elite ruin everything-but he has to be reasonably
> polite. He cannot continuously make slyly snide remarks in the hopes of
> provoking, he cannot   make his numerous other   habitual unpleasantries. I
> don't care if he can't spell, doesn't know any art history, can't write
> decent English, and is completely uneducated,he has to be polite. This is
true
> for any other lister as well. It would be nice if some effort was put into
> thinking, if   there was some engagement in the concerns of this list   but
> the first requirement is to be reasonably polite-no studied insults, and
> some connection with   the problems at hand. We were able to carry on like
> that for years, and Miller was a   part of it,so he is capable of it.
> Kate Sullivan

Reply via email to