In a message dated 10/13/12 5:43:37 PM, [email protected] writes:
> But might we not address the issues raised without having to actually > address Schneider's arguments (muddled as they are) - This refusal to deal > with issues outside of the instrumentality of one's own subjectivity > rather > than for the sake of the collective is the type of privatization of public > space that I indicated to William has come to be endemic of this listserv. > I > sent this text along because the question of the autonomy (independent > nature) of aesthetic experience seems to underlie many of this listserv's > members value systems, expectations and beliefs. > > Saul -- I actually believe it's a good thing when blabber mouths like me refuse to deal with issues outside our competence. I don't think my saying nothing is a "privatizing of public space". Almost the opposite. It's an affront for me to take up public space babbling on with "my thoughts" when the topic is something I don't understand at all. Believe it: the sole reason I said anything at all about Schneider's piece was this: I could imagine some listers reading it and humbly concluding, "This abstruse thing is over my head! I'm not schooled enough for this recondite forum!" When the fact is, as you say, the piece is impenetrable for the simple reason that it's muddled. I commend your attempt to clarify Schneider's use of 'autonomy' with your phrase "(independent nature) of aesthetic experience", but I'm not sure he meant to be talking about "experience" at all. If by "independent nature" you mean that (and you may not mean this) an "aesthetic experience" is sui generis, "its own thing" in the way that a taste experience is different from an aural experience or an orgasm experience, I'm with you. I myself have tried several times to generate forum discussion on this topic, but I was unpersuasive: the thread died the day I began it. (I'm ready to concede the failure may have been because I bungled my attempt to articulate the question.)
