Yeah, that was a very garbled way to say that no common art standards exist and no innate qualities determine art and that political issues dominate the field making slogan posters of all artwork, no matter who's making the judgments.
I really deplore cluttered academic writing. It's so filled with redundant code phrases. In fact, the code phrases constitute the real communication because they're the insignia to sympathetic readers, like a secret handshake or gang signal. Ugh! Takes me back to my academic days and reminds me that really silly people are the ones who write that garbage. wc ----- Original Message ---- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; [email protected] Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 7:37:13 AM Subject: Re: "Janet Wolff argues that sociologists, in wanting to expose the social bases of aesthetic judgment and matters of taste as culturally constructed, tend to discredit aesthetics altogether." In a message dated 10/8/10 5:02:56 AM, [email protected] writes: > Janet Wolff argues that sociologists, in wanting to expose the social > bases > of aesthetic judgment and matters of taste as culturally constructed, tend > to discredit aesthetics altogether. > Not surprising,surely? Kate Sullivan
