I always wonder who this "our" is. -----Original Message----- From: Cheerskep <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Dec 2, 2013 6:19 pm Subject: Re: comment invited
Also: In the Goodreads (favorable) review we find this: > "Arnaud Maillet reconfigures our historical > understanding of visual experience and meaning in relation to notions of > opacity, > transparency, and imagination." > I realize we can't blame Maillet for the line, and I also confess that I am highly touchy about this kind of linguistic blurriness, but I do rear up in protest whenever I read someone assuming there is ever such a thing as "OUR historical understanding" of anything whatever -- in particular of "experience" and "meaning". The idea that there can be an entity that amounts to a universal "understanding" of "meaning" (or much else when it comes to abstractions) is wickedly, harmfully, confused.
