This sounds good.
ks
-----Original Message-----
From: saul ostrow <[email protected]>
To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, Jan 13, 2013 5:23 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
