First of all, art is not capable of conscious action. It can't name itself. It is indistinguishable from anything else in terms of inherent quality. Only people decide what gets to be called art. Same with gold and diamonds and with rocks and angels, and a lot more, like God, the devel, and the ocean blue. Thus art neither gains or loses in the strict sense. Only what people claim as art changes and even that is all but impossible to figure out since every single person can come up with a personal decision. I suppose you'll never get off the elementary square one regarding questions about art. wc
----- Original Message ---- From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, November 6, 2010 6:09:09 PM Subject: Re: "It has now become clear that both art and culture have gradually lost their autonomy, and that consequently aesthetics as a discipline lost its former significance." On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:05 PM, William Conger <[email protected]>wrote: > How can art and culture have autonomy? How can they be autonomous with > respect > to each other and with respect to people? Hasn't art lost its autonomy to commerce which has managed to commodify creativity?
