On Oct 25, 2012, at 12:58 PM, saul ostrow <[email protected]> wrote:

> I do not think we should  reduce the work of art to the individual creative
> initiative of its author either - the key word I think is the idea of
> revealing the text - which implies that the text is concealed within what
> the author does

You make it seem like the "text" is contained within the artwork in some
definite way, rather than being re-instantiated every time when the work is
perceived again--and thus the text is not "concealed" at all but latent in
some way within the viewer's actions.

If you are thinking of the relatively unchanging aspects of a work--the fixed
written words, the depicted images--you are thinking of the "triggers" that
provoke the viewer's interpretation. I believe that every work contains
relatively permanent and knowable features within its material form, which the
viewer can (or does) access and reconstruct a "meaning" (or "text") that other
viewers also reconstruct, so the work is generally recognizable as "meaning"
the same thing.



| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady

Reply via email to