My main problem with journalistic art philosophy and criticism is that it follows the rule to be attention-grabbing with outrageous, unsupported headlines and topic sentences. It makes big, blustery, foolish statements that woud earn an F in any respected begining philosophy course. It panders to readers who like to read philosophy as though it's sports reporting.
wc ----- Original Message ---- From: Tom McCormack <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, August 9, 2012 11:24:24 AM Subject: Re: "...The core of the modernist aesthetic -- a hostility and defiance towards all traditional standards of excellence, discovered over millennia of craftsmanship and reflection; a notion of the artistbs freedom as absolute, and entirely divorced from t On Aug 8, 2012, at 5:41 PM, William Conger wrote: > This is crap. > wc > Agreed. I particularly abhor the existential assumption behind a phrase like "THE category of beauty". > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: joseph berg > <[email protected]> > To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, > August 8, 2012 2:25:05 PM > Subject: "...The core of the modernist aesthetic -- > a hostility and defiance > towards all traditional standards of excellence, > discovered over millennia of > craftsmanship and reflection; a notion of the > artistbs freedom as absolute, and > entirely divorced from t > > "...The core of > the modernist aesthetic -- a hostility and defiance towards > all traditional > standards of excellence, discovered over millennia of > craftsmanship and > reflection; a notion of the artists freedom as absolute, > and entirely divorced > from the ends of his art; and, as Roger Scruton has > so clearly demonstrated, a > refusal to apply the category of beauty to > either the creation or the > estimation of artwork." > http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2012/08/the_tyranny_of_2.htm > l
