Harry Collins.  He's considered the leading expert on the concept.  The other 
leading expert is Michael Polanyi.  Collins presents a further refinement of 
tacit knowledge, going beyond, he claims, Polanyi.  This book is not about art 
as such but about how we think and establish meaning. tacit knowledge deals 
with knowledge that can't be explicitly defined. 
wc


----- Original Message ----
From: ARMANDO BAEZA <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, May 20, 2010 1:09:35 PM
Subject: Re: Rewrite

this is regarding a book you mention a shot time ago called " Tacit and Implict 
knowledge",
What was the author's name?  I meant to buy it but lost the name. sounded 
interesting.
thanks
mando


________________________________
From: William Conger <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sun, May 16, 2010 8:51:10 AM
Subject: Re: Rewrite

This conversation assumes that quality and quantity are fixed concepts.  But 
they can be exchanged.  The old slogans "bigger is better" and "less is more" 
are examples of the tendency to confuse or exchange the terms.  In America and 
maybe throughout world culture there is strong evidence that the tendency is to 
favor "bigger is better" until the tipping point is passed.  Then bigger 
becomes a liability and the swing back to "less is more" starts anew. Almost 
always this exchange occurs for economic/political reasons, I think, far more 
than for moral or aesthetic reasons.  An example today would be the rejection 
of corporate farming (corn, soy, chemicals) for organic farming (the less is 
more turn).

When manufacturers and economists decided that bigger (more) is better they 
adopted the notion of "good enough" which enshrines the view that things should 
not be made better than they need to be for a short-term use  (planned 
obsolescence).  This was a radical shift from the earlier manufacturing ideals 
-- to make things as well as they can be (to outlast expectations).  What was 
formerly quality became quantity and visa-versa.

Warhol and Duchamp and even the utopian models of modernism reflected the 
bigger is better mode (unlimited possibilities of art, multiples, 
accessibility) but that may be reaching a tipping point back to less is more.  
Ironically --  how else? -- this tipping point is revealed by the exchange of 
100s of millions for a very few examples of the bigger is better art notion, a 
sort of inversion of the concept so that the more-ness and big-ness  of 
modernism and post modernism is exchanged into money itself, bigger money means 
the simultaneous apotheosis and death of the bigger is better view.
wc


----- Original Message ----
From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; William 
Conger <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, May 16, 2010 9:44:47 AM
Subject: Re: Rewrite

The proportion should stay the same



On 5/16/10 8:13 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

Isn't lots of people making more   pieces of art and there   consequently
being more quality   pieces   a lot like the monkeys with typewriters-the
more monkeys, the quicker they get to War and Peace? It doesn't sound right.
Kate Sullivan



--

Reply via email to