Re: \"The creation of Aboriginal art for an international market is poignantly paradigmatic of the modernist commodification of (fine) art in a very specific sense: as the abstraction and extracti

[Cheerskep]

Yo! Derek! Welcome back!

I'll copy the expert Kate Sullivan on what you should do, and I'm certain
she'll fill you in. I'm only the clueless guy with a few extra dollars to pay
the forum bill, but she's the brains of the site outfit.

So I'll keepB this email to a welcome-back, and answer your good question in
my next (tomorrow morning, alas; it's almost midnight here in New York
City).


>
> Hi Cheerskep
> B 
> I just re-joined to comment on your comment but I donbt know how to post
> to the list. Perhaps you could pass this on?
>  B 
> You said that bI continue to maintain it is a fundamental error, however
> romantic and
> self-aggrandizing for all of us, to maintain that "art" (artness, work of
> art)
> has a mind-independent ontic status.b
> B 
> At the risk of going over ground that I suspect you have all been over
> several times, what do you mean by ba mind-independent ontic statusb?
B Do you
> think anything has this status? If so, what would be an example? And why
> does it have it (and art not)?
> B 
> Ibm asking because your comment seems to imply that we should abandon the
> word bartb. (Does it imply that? Perhaps I have misunderstood.) Would
> abandoning the word help us in some way? What other word might we use?
> B 
> Lots of questions. Sorry.
> B 
> Derek