I like this too. wc
________________________________ From: saul ostrow <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, January 13, 2013 4:23:45 PM Subject: Re: Can art exist without authority? on another matter recently - someone clarified for me the idea that we think in language - that person explained what this refers to is the idea that our thought is semiotic - and the language of thought is comparable to that of a rebus (mixed systems of signification) and not spoken language - consequently when we speak we are trying to translate one system of representation (experience) into another - On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 2:40 PM, saul ostrow <[email protected]> wrote: > seemingly the term (word) art is an empty signifier in that its signified > is always emergent and as such no such category of physical objects as art > works actually exists apriori to its application - there are, those > things designated as such by convention and those that aspire to in some > manner be included in its definition - As such art exists (is) as a > nominal abstraction (a concept) - a representation (in the Kantian sense) > which means it is an intuited construct based on a wide variety of sensory > experiences , which over time is objectified - Within the present context > we may see the history of art, aesthetics, and various theories as being > the means to substantiate, differentiate, and validate the metaphysical > construction of "art" as corresponding to some "thing(s)" in the world > rather than the wide range of experience that succeeding generations in the > west have sought to give logical and rational form to > > > On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:42 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The topic here -- 'Can art exist without authority' -- is so vague, so >> ambiguous, that anyone who tries to grapple with it in its unclear >> formulation >> is liable to be entrapped into blurry generalities as Saul is (below). The >> clarification might start with the notion behind the word 'art' there. >> Are we >> to think of "art" as an activity? A vast collection of physical works? An >> (imaginary) ontic quality, "artness", which, when a given work "has" it, >> makes that work a "work of art"? >> >> >> In a message dated 1/12/13 10:50:27 AM, [email protected] writes: >> >> >> > art exist within its histories and those histories are sustained by >> > various >> > validating structures (institutions) - the primary function of these >> being >> > to maintain the notion that such a thing as art exists >> >> > > > -- > S a u l O s t r o w > > *Critical Voices* > > 21STREETPROJECTS > La Table Ronde > 162 West 21 Street > NYC, NY 10011 > > > [email protected] > www.21stprojects.org > > -- S a u l O s t r o w *Critical Voices* 21STREETPROJECTS La Table Ronde 162 West 21 Street NYC, NY 10011 [email protected] www.21stprojects.org
